scholarly journals Building Trust: Defining Subject Matter Expertise through U.S. Federal Peer Review Policy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredith Goins
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Building Trust ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise

Exploring the Fourth Order

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barend KLITSIE ◽  
Rebecca PRICE ◽  
Christine DE LILLE
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Fourth Order ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Action Research Project ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Building Trust ◽  
Current Business

Companies are organised to fulfil two distinctive functions: efficient and resilient exploitation of current business and parallel exploration of new possibilities. For the latter, companies require strong organisational infrastructure such as team compositions and functional structures to ensure exploration remains effective. This paper explores the potential for designing organisational infrastructure to be part of fourth order subject matter. In particular, it explores how organisational infrastructure could be designed in the context of an exploratory unit, operating in a large heritage airline. This paper leverages insights from a long-term action research project and finds that building trust and shared frames are crucial to designing infrastructure that affords the greater explorative agenda of an organisation.

Healthcare handoffs among lay caregivers

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Chastain ◽  
Anil R Kumar ◽  
Dan Nathan-Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Study Design ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Informal Caregivers ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Home Healthcare ◽  
Conflicting Information ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
Published Research

Abstract Background Much of home healthcare is also performed by informal caregivers. This paper seeks to add understanding to the home healthcare field, specifically studying care handoffs between informal caregivers. This study included 16 trained and 20 lay participants to determine differences due to expertise. This comparison is useful because there is a lot of published research on healthcare handoff happenings involving healthcare professionals, and the results indicate how much of the published research can be applied to care handoffs between informal caregivers. Objective The primary objective of this study is to identify differences between lay and professional caregivers when there is uncertainty in a caregiving handoff from their fellow caregiver. Methods The study design included between-group analysis of Expertise (layman and expert) and within-group analysis of Task Difficulty and Communication Modality. Dependent variables included willingness to ask for help, confidence in handoff instructions, confidence in the ability to complete tasks and task accuracy. Both Expertise groups were given the same four scenarios in a repeated measures study design. Results The findings suggest statistically significant differences in how informal caregivers respond to unclear handoff instructions, where lay participants were more confident in understanding instructions, more confident in executing the tasks, less willing to ask for help and also less able to spot and resolve conflicting information compared to trained participants. Lower performance in resolving conflicting information was exhibited by the lay participants. However, when comparing with the syringes that were prepared correctly, it was observed that the accuracy of those prepared syringes was higher for lay participants than for trained participants. Conclusion It was anticipated that lay participants would be more willing to ask for help due to lack of subject matter expertise and trained participants would be more confident in completing tasks due to their superior subject matter expertise, but the opposite was true in both cases. It was also anticipated that lay and trained participants would be equally confident of the instructions given by their fellow caregiver, yet trained participants were less confident. The results from this study have impacts on the design of instructions (often by formal caregivers) for informal caregivers.

Part I Introduction, 4 Dispute Resolution and Specialized ADR for Islamic Finance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
White Andrew
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Parallel System ◽  
The State ◽  
Islamic Finance ◽  
Institutional Frameworks ◽  
Widespread Implementation ◽  
Subject Specific ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
State Resistance

This chapter assesses dispute resolution in Islamic finance. Simply referred to as ‘IDR’ (Islamic Dispute Resolution), this Shari’a-based form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) not only provides desperately needed subject matter expertise in Islamic finance dispute resolution but at the same time accommodates Islamic legal values and traditions in resolving the disputes that inevitably arise in the context of Islamic finance. As with construction arbitration, or labour arbitration, or any other subject-specific ADR process, IDR for Islamic finance is simply another mode of private commercial adjudication. Moreover, from the viewpoint of the State, it is much less threatening than a parallel system of Shari’a courts, which may reach decisions over which the State has no ultimate say. In fact, contrasted with such a parallel system, absent an amicable settlement—in which case the State would have no stake or direct interest anyway—the ultimate adjudication by an IDR intermediary would be subject to review and affirmation by the courts as an arbitral award. Rather than popular or state resistance to the idea of IDR, currently the greatest obstacle to increased and more widespread implementation of IDR for Islamic finance disputes is insufficient expertise and extremely limited facilitative legal and institutional frameworks.

scholarly journals Navigating the Publication Process: An ASABE Journals’ Perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 1147-1153
Author(s):  
Garey A. Fox ◽  
Kyle R. Douglas-Mankin ◽  
Kasiviswanathan Muthukumarappan ◽  
Jun Zhu ◽  
Joseph C. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Review Time ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Quality Review

Abstract. HighlightsASABE journals publish impactful research in multiple article types in addition to research articles. Prospective authors should consider a journal’s peer-review quality, readership, metrics, and page charges. An article’s impact should be measured based on citations instead of predicted based on the journal’s impact factor. Always recommend subject matter experts as reviewers so that a manuscript can benefit from their suggestions. Publishing in ASABE journals offers opportunities for contributing to and being recognized by the profession. Keywords: Impact factor, Page charges, Peer-reviewed journals, Review quality, Review time

Using the Sentence Verification Technique To Assess the Comprehension of Technical Text as a Function of Subject Matter Expertise

1984 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 839-869 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Royer ◽  
Douglas J. Lynch ◽  
Ronald K. Hambleton ◽  
Christopher Bulgareli
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise

Expert vs. Expert: Lessons from Badham v. Eu

1985 ◽  
Vol 18 (03) ◽  
pp. 576-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Wuffle
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony ◽  
Ad Hominem ◽  
Important Observation ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise

Professors Cain and Grofman were kind enough to suggest that I review the expert witness declarations inBadham v. Eu(D.C. California, 1984) in the light of my own previous research on expert witness testimony to identify frequently used modes of argumentation.The single most important observation I can make about the nature of the expert witness testimony inBadhamis to note its high quality. The experts inBadhamare addressing real issues. The differences among these experts rest on differing normative views and on disputes about difficult empirical and methodological questions. Moreover, the genuine expertise of these social scientists cannot be in dispute. Thus, the most common techniques used in disputations among experts: (1) impeaching an expert witness' motives (e.g., accusing him of being a “hired gun” or an “ideological partisan”); (2) downgrading his academic credentials or claims to subject matter expertise; and (3) finding instances where his testimony has been repudiated by the courts, are simply inapplicable. This has not left the experts inBadhamat a loss for words—but none of the disagreements among them are in the nature of ad hominem attacks.

scholarly journals Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Science and the CBRNE Science Medical Operations Science Support Expert (CMOSSE)

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 995-1010
Author(s):  
C. Norman Coleman ◽  
Judith L. Bader ◽  
John F. Koerner ◽  
Chad Hrdina ◽  
Kenneth D. Cliffer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Incident Management ◽  
Senior Managers ◽  
Preparedness Planning ◽  
Medical Response ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
Response And Recovery

ABSTRACTA national need is to prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional disasters categorized as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive (CBRNE). These incidents require specific subject-matter expertise, yet have commonalities. We identify 7 core elements comprising CBRNE science that require integration for effective preparedness planning and public health and medical response and recovery. These core elements are (1) basic and clinical sciences, (2) modeling and systems management, (3) planning, (4) response and incident management, (5) recovery and resilience, (6) lessons learned, and (7) continuous improvement. A key feature is the ability of relevant subject matter experts to integrate information into response operations. We propose the CBRNE medical operations science support expert as a professional who (1) understands that CBRNE incidents require an integrated systems approach, (2) understands the key functions and contributions of CBRNE science practitioners, (3) helps direct strategic and tactical CBRNE planning and responses through first-hand experience, and (4) provides advice to senior decision-makers managing response activities. Recognition of both CBRNE science as a distinct competency and the establishment of the CBRNE medical operations science support expert informs the public of the enormous progress made, broadcasts opportunities for new talent, and enhances the sophistication and analytic expertise of senior managers planning for and responding to CBRNE incidents.

Buying subject-matter expertise: an innovative approach to business classes

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip English ◽  
Rachel Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Course Design ◽  
Technical Problem ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Quality Analysis ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
The Subject

PurposeThis paper introduces a new instructional design for executive programs that combined a flipped classroom methodology and experiential learning to address the challenge of teaching highly technical material in a compressed time frame. In practice, when decision-making executives lack technical expertise and face a highly technical problem, they contract for subject-matter expertise (SME) within the firm or through hiring consultants. The authors show how this can be done in a classroom setting to enhance the learning experience.Design/methodology/approachThe classroom approach utilizes students from other programs as analysts for executive MBA (EMBA) teams faced with case analysis that involves technical issues in finance. The analysts act as subject-matter experts for the EMBA students.FindingsExecutive student learning is not eroded by relying on the analysts, and, moreover, the use of analysts enhances EMBA student understandingPractical implicationsExecutives are able, in a short time frame, to produce high quality analysis by utilizing the subject-matter experts. Executives also learn how to ask the right questions and evaluate the quality of the analysis created by the subject-matter experts. The subject-matter experts, who are also students, derive added benefits of an employment experience in finance, learning how to interpret instructions about the analysis and how to respond to feedback.Originality/valueThe paper illustrates a new course design where the course's technical analysis aspects mimic work environments enhancing student learning.

Experts Judging Experts: The Role of Expertise in Reviewing Agency Decision Making

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 55-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Banks Miller ◽  
Brett Curry
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
Federal Circuit

What role does judicial subject matter expertise play in the review of agency decisions? Using a data set of decisions in which the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) is reviewed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, we investigate this question and find that greater subject matter expertise does make it more likely that a judge will vote to reverse an agency decision.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document