In this editorial essay I explore the possibilities of ââ?¬Ë?improvement scholarshipââ?¬â?¢\nin order to set the scene for the theme of, and the other papers in, this issue. I\ncontrast a narrow conception of quality improvement (QI) research with a much\nbroader and more inclusive conception, arguing that we should greatly extend the\nexisting dialogue between ââ?¬Ë?problem-solvingââ?¬â?¢ and ââ?¬Ë?criticalââ?¬â?¢ currents in improvement\nresearch. I have in mind the potential for building a much larger conversation\nbetween those people in ââ?¬Ë?improvement scienceââ?¬â?¢ who are expressly concerned with\ntackling the problems facing healthcare and the wider group of colleagues who are\nengaged in health-related scholarship but who do not see themselves as particularly\ninterested in quality improvement, indeed who may be critical of the language or\nconcerns of QI. As one contribution to that conversation I suggest that that the\nincreasing emphasis on theory and rigour in improvement research should include\nmore focus on normative theory and rigour. The remaining papers in the issue are\nintroduced including the various ways in which they handle the ââ?¬Ë?implicit normativityââ?¬â?¢\nof QI research and practice, and the linked theme of combining relatively\nââ?¬Ë?tidyââ?¬â?¢ and potentially ââ?¬Ë?unrulyââ?¬â?¢ forms of knowledge.
Loading....