Search results

While there is considerable evidence supporting the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment, the relationship between the antecedents of job satisfaction, organizational commitment and career commitment are not clearly understood. This study seeks to clarify whether these antecedents have an effect independent of job satisfaction on career commitment or whether these antecedents are mediated by job satisfaction.

In total, 2,799 questionnaires were mailed out to members of the American College of Healthcare Executives (ACHE). The responses received were 643 (22.9 percent) and after eliminating retirees or students, a sample of 456 respondents currently employed in the health care industry was obtained. Path analysis was conducted to test the hypothetical relationships between work situation, career experiences and career commitment.

It was found that job satisfaction mediated the influences of job tenure and career pattern on career commitment. Job satisfaction partially mediated the influences of perceived job security and one's satisfaction with career on career commitment. Both of these measures had a direct influence on career commitment. Career experience such as sector change was also positively associated with career commitment.

While the research offers some insights into the factors affecting the career commitment of health care executives, the sample was limited to respondents who were members of the American College of Healthcare Executives, and thus may not represent the views of all managers in the health care sector.

To retain high‐valued health care workers it is important that an organization has a work environment that enhances their commitment to their occupation as well as their careers.

This study clarifies the influence of job satisfaction on the career commitment of health care managers during a very dynamic period.

As the world of healthcare changes rapidly, healthcare leaders and managers must hone their leadership competencies in order to remain effective in their organizations. With changes such as the Affordable Care Act, increasing medical school costs, decreased graduation rates, and increased needs for care, how are current and future healthcare leaders adapting? In light of the large-scale changes in the healthcare field in recent years, the purpose of this study was to investigate which National Center for Healthcare Leadership (NCHL) competencies were referenced by exemplary healthcare leaders as most important for success in today’s changing healthcare environment. Interviews were conducted with 26 mid- and upper-level healthcare leaders identified by the C-level executives in their organizations as exemplary performers. Change leadership, self-development, talent development, and team leadership were the top four NCHL competencies most frequently referenced, with thematic analysis revealing additional underlying themes in the exemplary leaders’ dialogue.

Amongst the alternate property sectors, healthcare property has recently become an important property sector for major investors such as pension funds in the global property landscape; particularly in the UK, and being driven by the ageing population demographics. The purpose of this paper is to assess the significance, risk-adjusted performance and portfolio diversification benefits of UK healthcare property in a UK property and mixed-asset portfolio over 2007–2016. Both healthcare property and listed healthcare property channels are assessed. Drivers and risk factors for the on-going development of the healthcare property sector are also identified.

Using annual total returns, the risk-adjusted performance and portfolio diversification benefits of UK healthcare property over 2007–2016 is assessed. An asset allocation diagram is used to assess the role of both healthcare property channels in a UK property portfolio and in a UK mixed-asset portfolio.

Both UK healthcare property and listed healthcare property delivered superior risk-adjusted returns compared to UK property, stocks and listed property over 2007–2016, with portfolio diversification benefits in the fuller mixed-asset portfolio context, but not in a narrower property portfolio context. Importantly, this sees both UK healthcare property channels as strongly contributing to the UK property and mixed-asset portfolios across the entire portfolio risk spectrum and validating the property industry perspective of healthcare property being low risk and providing diversification benefits in a mixed-asset portfolio. However, this was not to the loss or substitution of traditional direct property exposure.

Healthcare property is an alternate property sector that has become increasingly important in recent years. The results highlight the important role of both healthcare property channels in a UK property portfolio and in a UK mixed-asset portfolio. The strong risk-adjusted performance of both UK healthcare property compared to UK property, stocks and listed property sees both UK healthcare property channels contributing to the mixed-asset portfolio across the entire portfolio risk spectrum. This is particularly important, as many investors (e.g. pension funds) now see healthcare property as an important property sector in their overall portfolio; particularly with the ageing population dynamics in most countries. The importance of both healthcare property channels sees healthcare property exposure accessible to both small investors and large investors.

This paper is the first published empirical research analysis of the risk-adjusted performance of UK healthcare property, and the role of healthcare property in a UK property portfolio and in a UK mixed-asset portfolio. This research enables empirically validated, more informed and practical property investment decision-making regarding the strategic role of both healthcare property and listed healthcare property in a portfolio.

The UK Government-funded National Health Service (NHS) is experiencing significant pressures because of the complexity of challenges to, and demands of, health-care provision. This situation has driven government policy level support for transformational change initiatives, such as value-based health care (VBHC), through closer alignment and collaboration across the health-care system-life science sector nexus. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the necessary antecedents to collaboration in VBHC through a critical exploration of the existing literature, with a view to establishing the foundations for further development of policy, practice and theory in this field.

A literature review was conducted via searches on Scopus and Google Scholar between 2009 and 2019 for peer-reviewed articles containing keywords and phrases “Value-based healthcare industry” and “healthcare industry collaboration”. Refinement of the results led to the identification of “guiding conditions” (GCs) for collaboration in VBHC.

Five literature-derived GCs were identified as necessary for the successful implementation of initiatives such as VBHC through system-sector collaboration. These are: a multi-disciplinarity; use of appropriate technological infrastructure; capturing meaningful metrics; understanding the total cycle-of-care; and financial flexibility. This paper outlines research opportunities to empirically test the relevance of the five GCs with regard to improving system-sector collaboration on VBHC.

This paper has developed a practical and constructive framework that has the potential to inform both policy and further theoretical development on collaboration in VBHC.

The goal of this contribution is to shed light on the benefits for research in health care coming from the use of administrative data, especially in terms of measuring hospitals’ outcomes. The main approaches to health outcome evaluation are reviewed and the possible improvements deriving from the use of administrative data are highlighted. Administrative data may be an essential element in the process of gathering to the public true rankings of health care organizations, reducing the degree of asymmetric information that typically arises in health care. Patients will be more aware of the best institutions, which will induce most of them to demand to be admitted in them, taking into account the costs associated with distance and with the severity of the illness. This in turn may ask for a reorganization of the sector, closing some organizations and expanding others, having as final goal to improve the health status of the population, without income barriers. This is one of the first attempts to provide an overview of the advantages that administrative data may gather in health care.

Digital transformation (DT) is a priority for the healthcare sector. In many countries, it is still considered in the early stages with an underestimation of its benefits and potentiality. Especially in Italy, little is known about the impact of digitalization – particularly of the Internet of Things (IoT) – on the healthcare sector, for example, in terms of clinician's jobs and patient's experience. Drawing from such premises, the paper aims to focus on an overlooked healthcare area related to the chronic heart diseases field and its relationship with DT. The authors aim at exploring and framing the main variables of remote Monitoring (RM) adoption as a specific archetype of healthcare digitalization, both on patients and medical staff level, by shedding some lights on its overall implementation.

The authors empirically inquiry the RM adoption within the context of the Cardiology Department of the Casilino General Hospital of Rome. To answer our research question, the authors reconstruct the salient information by using induction-type reasoning, direct observation and interviewees with 12 key informants, as well as secondary sources analysis related to the hospital (internal documentation, presentations and technical reports).

According to a socio-technical framework, the authors build a model composed of five main variables related to medical staff and patients. The authors classify such variables into an input-process-output (I-P-O) model. RM adoption driver represents the input; cultural digital divide, structure flexibility and reaction to change serve the process and finally, RM outcome stands for the output. All these factors, interacting together, contribute to understanding the RM adoption process for chronic disease management.

The authors' research presents two main limitations. The first one is related to using a qualitative method, which is less reliable in terms of replication and the interpretive role of researchers. The second limitation, connected to the first one, is related to the study's scale level, which focuses on a mono-centric consistent level of analysis.

The paper offers a clear understanding of the RM attributes and a comprehensive view for improving the overall quality management of chronic diseases by suggesting that clinicians carefully evaluate both hard and soft variables when undertaking RM adoption decisions.

RM technologies could impact on society both in ordinary situations, by preventing patient mobility issues and transport costs, and in extraordinary times (such as a pandemic), where telemedicine contributes to supporting hospitals in swapping in-person visits with remote controls, in order to minimize the risk of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contagion or the spread of the virus.

The study enriches the knowledge and understanding of RM adoption within the healthcare sector. From a theoretical perspective, the authors contribute to the healthcare DT adoption debate by focusing on the main variables contributing to the DT process by considering both medical staff and patient's role. From a managerial perspective, the authors highlight the main issues for RM of chronic disease management to enable the transition toward its adoption. Such issues range from the need for awareness of the medical staff about RM advantages to the need for adapting the organizational structure and the training and education process of the patients.

To examine hospital leadership team effectiveness, analyses the responses of 540 randomly sampled board chairmen of US hospitals. Reports findings regarding board chairmen′s evaluation of their hospitals′ productive outputs and of the adequacy of their communications with the CEO and medical staff president (MSP) in their hospitals. Notes that over one‐quarter of board chairmen found communications with the MSP to be only sometimes productive and notes means whereby positive communications are promoted. Offers suggestions for board chairman recruitment.