Loughborough University
Leicestershire, UK
LE11 3TU
+44 (0)1509 263171
Loughborough University

Loughborough University Institutional Repository

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/11944

Title: From policy to practice : the implementation of developmental community mental handicap teams in Nottinghamshire
Authors: Cotmore, Richard A.
Issue Date: 1988
Publisher: © R.A. Cotmore
Abstract: Community mental handicap teams (CMHTs) are currently in vogue, although each of the constituent elements in their title: community; mental handicap; and team, are attracting much debate, hence these different concepts are explored. There is much variation between CMHTs in practice, one example being Notts where the CMHTs have been established uniquely with an explicit development role. This research is an empirical study of the first three CMHTs established in Notts and has two main foci: implementation and teamwork. Debates in the implementation field between the Bottom-up and Topdown models provide the backcloth for the unfolding of the CMHTs' establishment and development. These models are found to be too polarised and inflexible but a dimensions approach proves useful for overcoming the polarity without losing the insights of either model. Variation between the CMHTs in practice is partly accounted for by their different environments. Negotiation is a key element in the CMHTs' responses to their environments as teams carve out a niche for themselves in established structures and processes. This study examines the environments of the Notts CMHTs to understand how they have undertaken such negotiations. The CMHTs' internal dynamics are also studied, focusing on their experiences of co-operation. Particular aspects are studied in depth, for example, leadership, communication, conflict and· roles, and are shown clearly to inter-relate. Further, the models of co-operation employed by the teams are examined. Many theoretical models exist, and these are "tried" against the evidence, rather than trying to make the evidence fit the frameworks. A crucial question becomes: how is the work done, in an individualist or shared manner? A series of classifications is preferred to a composite measure because of differences within teams according to personnel and task. The distinction between teams and networks is seen as valid, with the question of identity emerging as a determining factor.
Description: A Doctoral Thesis. Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy of Loughborough University.
URI: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/11944
Appears in Collections:PhD Theses (Social Sciences)

Files associated with this item:

File Description SizeFormat
Thesis-1988-Cotmore.pdf9.58 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Form-1988-Cotmore.pdf38.2 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


SFX Query

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.