JCPSLP Vol 20 No 2 July 2018

critical appraisal). Four themes were identified which reflected the nature of the speech pathologists’ ethical dilemmas. Despite Libby and Mark reviewing SPA’s Code of Ethics in their earlier meeting, Mark is interested in the findings of this study which raise specific issues that he has not yet considered. including “balancing benefit and harm, fidelity of business practices, distributing funds, and personal and professional integrity” (p. 290). Libby and Mark talk through how the results of these interviews may inform his thinking in the planning phase of his business, particularly given many subthemes are related to his intention to employ additional staff (i.e., fidelity of business practices, supervision and management of less experienced staff). Mark feels that developing awareness of experienced speech pathologists’ ethical concerns in conjuction with reviewing the range of resources published by Speech Pathology Australia will assist him in developing a business model that is ethically sound. Given the limited number of papers exploring speech pathology and entrepreneurship, the inclusion of articles from the realm of management and business provide further insight into personal considerations for Mark’s new business venture. Mark is keen to succeed with his large financial investment and wants to make sure he has the qualities of a successful business person. In the second paper, Murmann and Sardana (2012) proposed a framework of decision-making (informed by review of the literature) used by successful entrepreneurs in challenging contexts involving time constraints and high numbers of decisions. Their decision-making framework considered different degrees of ambiguity within the decision-making process and the level of expertise of the person making the decision. The resulting four decision-making styles, (a) Critical-point comprehensive analysis, (b) Delegation to expertise, (c) Expertise based evaluation, and (d) Consultative deliberation, offer insight into the ways in which different people may approach decision-making and provide the basis for Mark and Libby’s discussion. In light of the findings of this paper Mark and Libby explore how Mark will approach the management of his practice, how and when he would seek consultation if dealing with an area of little expertise (e.g., business set up and

SpeechBITE, Google Scholar and Macquarie University MultiSearch. It quickly becomes evident from the searches that published research is not only limited in the area of speech pathology and business; it is limited across allied health and business more broadly. As a result, it is difficult for Mark and Libby to evaluate the quality of evidence for the combined domains of “health” and “business” using the NHMRC Body of Evidence Matrix. The search did indicate that there were studies examining characteristics of entrepreneurial professionals which would be helpful in guiding Mark as a potential business operator to reflect on his own personality traits and attitudes toward decision-making and compare against those of successful entrepreneurs. There was also research available which investigated ethical dilemmas for private practitioners in an Australian context, important information that will shape business management considerations. Mark and Libby review 64 abstracts and exclude papers if: (a) they are personal narratives or observations; (b) more than ten years old; (c) they report on medical practices overseas (due to the varied nature of government funding which influences practice management and systems); (d) have a narrow focus of study unsuitable to topic; (e) there is an unclear research question; or (f) full text is not available. Three articles remain for critical analysis following full text review. See Figure 1. Libby and Mark decide to review the three remaining articles to identify any personal or organisational aspects for consideration. These articles include a qualitative study of ethical dilemmas faced by speech pathologists in private practice (Flatley, Kenny & Lincoln, 2014), a proposed framework of entrepreneurial decision-making based on a review of the literature (Murmann & Sardana, 2012), and a longitudinal study exploring resilience of entrepreneurs and how this influences business success (Ayala & Manzano, 2014). Mark reviews the three papers and discusses the findings with Libby at his next meeting. In the first paper by Flatley et al. (2014), 10 speech pathologists from diverse private practice settings were interviewed. Qualitative methodology involving thematic analysis was utilised (see Table 1 for

Articles excluded following review of full text – not deemed applicable

Articles excluded due to type of study, namely personal narrative – 8

Total number of articles identified in review of topics – 64

Articles excluded due to country of origin – 42

Remaining articles – 3

Figure 1. Article review process

90

JCPSLP Volume 20, Number 2 2018

Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology