Succeeding Through Service Innovation: Consumer Directed Care in the Aged Care Sector

  • Linda Wilkins
  • Carmel Laragy
  • Hossein S. Zadeh
Part of the Service Science: Research and Innovations in the Service Economy book series (SSRI)


The growing challenge and diversity of ageing populations is a key global issue for struggling health systems. Consumer Directed Care (CDC), an innovative service delivery system, opens up possibilities for re-defining consumer expectations, prompting change in how health service providers operate. As a service delivery model, CDC offers improved responsiveness to individual requirements; and increased transparency in the use of allocated funding. Where implemented, CDC has established new relationships and interactions between key stakeholders, co-creating value for older citizens. This chapter reviews some drivers for the development of service innovation, surveys various in-country approaches, highlights current trends in CDC delivery and describes an EU policy impact assessment instrument to aid funding bodies. The chapter concludes by speculating on organizational outcomes from CDC and the likelihood that the introduction of this innovative service delivery model will require closer collaborative relationships between service providers and information technology specialists.


Consumer directed care ICT and aged care healthcare services service innovation service systems case study 


  1. Administration on Ageing (2006). “Choices for Independence: Modernizing the Older Americans Act, Department of Health and Ageing”, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Araujo, L. and Spring, M. (2006) Services products and the institutional structure of production, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 35, pp 797–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2008) (retrieved 10th December 2010).
  4. Barnes, C. (Nov 2004). Independent Living, Politics and Implications, Paper presented at the “Conference on Independent Living”, Copthorne Tara Hotel, London.Google Scholar
  5. Carmichael, A. and Brown, L. (2002). The Future Challenge for Direct Payments, Disability and Society, Vol 17, No 7, pp 797–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Commission for Social Care Inspection. (2006a). “Making Choices: Taking Risks”, Commission for Social Care Inspection, Newcastle, England.Google Scholar
  7. Commission for Social Care Inspection. (2006b). “Real Voices, Real Choices: The Qualities People Expect from Care Services”, Commission for Social Care Inspection, Newcastle, England.Google Scholar
  8. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia (2008). “About Australia service sector world class tertiary industries”,, retrieved Nov 7, 2008.
  9. Department of Health and Ageing (2008). Report on the Operation of the Aged Care Act 1997 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008 Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar
  10. European Commission Impact Assessment (2006) (retrieved 10th Dec 2010).
  11. Gauthier, P. (2006). “Employers Review of the CSIL Program”, Paraplegic Association, British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  12. Head, M. and Conroy, J. W. (2005). Outcomes of Self-Determination in Michigan, In R. Stancliffe and C. Larkin (Eds.), “Costs and Outcomes of Community Services for People with Intellectual Disabilities”, pp. 219–240, Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  13. Hutchison, P., Lord, J., and Salisbury, B. (2006). North American Approaches to Individualised Planning and Direct Funding, In J. Leece and J. Bornat (Eds.), “Developments in Direct Payments”, pp. 49–62, The Policy Press, University of Bristol, Bristol.Google Scholar
  14. IfM and IBM. (2008). “Succeeding through Service Innovation: A Service Perspective for Education, Research, Business and Government”, University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing, ISBN: 978-1-902546-65-0, Cambridge, United Kingdom,
  15. Individual Budgets Evaluation Network. (2008). “Evaluation of the Individual Budgets Pilot Programme: Final Report, Social Policy Research Unit”, University of York, York.Google Scholar
  16. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. (2008). “Person-Centred Support, What Service Users and Practitioners Say”, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.Google Scholar
  17. Laragy, C., and Naughtin, G. (2009). “Increasing Consumer Choice in the Aged Care Services: A Position Paper/Carmel Laragy and Gerry Naughtin”, Social Policy and Ageing Program Research and Policy Centre, Brotherhood of St Laurence, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  18. Leadbeater, C., Bartlett, J., and Gallagher, N. (2008). “Making It Personal”, DEMOS, London.Google Scholar
  19. Lord, J. and Hutchison, P. (2003). Individualised Support and Funding: Building Blocks for Capacity Building, Disability and Society, Vol 18, No 1, pp 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L, and Malter, A J (2006). Marketing as Service-Exchange: Taking a Leadership Role in Global Marketing Management, Organizational Dynamics, Vol 35, No 3, pp 264–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mahoney, K., Wieler Fishman, N., Doty, P., and Squillace, M. (2007). The Future of Cash and Counseling: The Framers’ View. Health Services Research, Vol 42, No 1, pp 550–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Millard, J. (2008). eGovernment Measurement for Policy Makers, European Journal of ePractice, http://www.epracticejournal.eul, No 4, August 2008. ISSN: 1988-625X, retrieved Feb 18, 2008.
  23. NHHRC (National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission) (2008). A Healthier Future for All Australians Interim Report, Commonwealth of Australia pub 2009.Google Scholar
  24. Nicholls, A. (2007). “Older peoples’ services and individual budgets: good practice: examples and ideas”, Commissioned by Judith Whittam, Individual Budget Pilot Advisor, for Care Services Improvement Partnership,, Leeds, retrieved Feb 2009.
  25. O’Donovan, M.A., Doyle, A. (2006). “Measuring Activity and Participation of People with Disabilities – an Overview”, Health Research Board, MAP Bulletin, November 2006, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
  26. Office for Disability Issues. (2007). “The Costs and Benefits of Independent Living”, Office for Disability Issues, England.Google Scholar
  27. Office for Disability Issues. (2008). “Independent Living: A Cross-Government Strategy About Independent Living for Disabled People”, Office for Disability Issues, England.Google Scholar
  28. Österle, A. and Hammer, E. (2007). Cash Allowances and the Formalization of Care Arrangements: The Austrian Experience. In C. Ungerson (Ed.), “Cash for Care in Developed Welfare States”, pp. 13–31, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire.Google Scholar
  29. Poll, C., Duffy, S., Hatton, C., Sanderson, H., and Routledge, M. (2006). “A Report on in Control’s First Phase 2003–2005”, In Control Publications, London.Google Scholar
  30. Quinn, J.B. and Paquette, P.C. (1990), “Technology in Services: Creating Organizational Revolutions”, Sloan Management Review, Vol 31 No 2, pp 67–78.Google Scholar
  31. Quinn, J. B., Baruch, J. J., and Paquette, P. C., (1987). “Technology in Services”, Scientific American, Vol 257, No 6, pp 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ramirez, R. (1999) Value Co-Production: Intellectual Origins and Implications for Practice and Research, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 20, pp 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reynolds, I. (2007). “Systems of Support and Brokerage: Report on Interim Research Evaluation for West Sussex In Control Brokerage Pilot”, Respite independence and supporting employment for carers in West Sussex (RISE), West Sussex.Google Scholar
  34. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2006). “Choosing Independence: An Overview of the Cash and Counseling Model of Self-Directed Personal Assistance Services”, Robert Johnson Wood Foundation, Princeton.Google Scholar
  35. Social Care Institute for Excellence. (2007). “Choice, control and individual budgets: emerging themes”, London, England., retrieved Feb 2009.
  36. Spohrer, J., Maglio, P. P., Bailey, J. and Gruhl, D. (2007). “Steps Toward a Science of Service Systems”, IEEE Xplore, retrieved Oct 29, 2008.Google Scholar
  37. Summers, M. (2007). “Great Expectations: A Policy Case Study of Four Case Management Programs in One Organisation”, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  38. The World Health Organisation (2008). “The World Health Report”,, retrieved Feb 17, 2009.
  39. Tien, J. M. and Berg, D. (March 2003) A Case for Service Systems Engineering, Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, Vol 12, No1, pp 13–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ungerson, C. and Yeandle, S. (2007). Conclusion: Dilemmas, Contradictions and Change. In C. Ungerson and S. Yeandle (Eds.), “Cash for Care in Developed Welfare States”, pp. 187–207, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire, England.Google Scholar
  41. Wisconsin Department of Health and Human Services. (2008a). “Statewide expansion of managed long-term care”, Wisconsin, USA,, retrieved April 2008.

Copyright information

© Springer US 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda Wilkins
    • 1
  • Carmel Laragy
    • 2
  • Hossein S. Zadeh
    • 3
  1. 1.Australian Catholic UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Global Studies Social Science and Planning, College of Design and Social ContextRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.School of Business, and Logistics, Information Technology, College of BusinessRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations