Assessing hospitals' readiness for clinical governance quality initiatives through organisational climate

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to consider organisational climate as the vehicle to get an understanding, map and enhance the appropriate organisational culture for good clinical governance (CG). Based on this assertion, the purpose of this research is fourfold: to investigate CG attributes embedded in Greek hospitals' climate; to test the validity and reliability of the Clinical Governance Climate Questionnaire (CGCQ) and highlight the dimensions of CG climate in the Greek context; to illuminate the “red flag” aspects of hospital's climate and areas shaping the perceptions of the quality of the provided services; and to explore the influence of hospital's legal status on CG climate and service quality.

Design/methodology/approach

Empirical research using the CGCQ was conducted in three Greek NHS hospitals. A total of 214 usable questionnaires completed by the hospitals' personnel were gathered.

Findings

The validity and reliability tests proved that the study's five‐dimension structure of CGCQ is capable of conceptualising the basic elements of CG climate in the Greek context. Hospital's climate was found to be not supportive to successful CG implementation, and areas that demand attention were illuminated. Hospital's legal status seems to mediate CG climate and service quality.

Practical implications

CGCQ proved to be a useful tool for managers and policymakers to trace “problematic” areas of hospital's climate and develop strategies for successful CG initiatives.

Originality/value

The paper contributes to the field of health care management, since it demonstrates that CG climate can be used as a “gauge” of the prevailing CG culture. CGCQ is revealed as a valid, reliable and flexible tool.

Citation

Karassavidou, E., Glaveli, N. and Zafiropoulos, K. (2011), "Assessing hospitals' readiness for clinical governance quality initiatives through organisational climate", Journal of Health Organization and Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 214-240. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777261111134437