Search results

The goal was to improve the quality of the hospitalization process and the management of patients, allowing the reduction of costs and the minimization of the preoperative Length of Hospital Stay (LOS).

The methodology used to improve the quality of the hospitalization process and patient management was Lean Thinking. Therefore, the Lean tools (Value stream map and Ishikawa diagram) were used to identify waste and inefficiencies, improving the process with the implementation of corrective actions. The data was collected through personal observations, patient interviews, brainstorming and from printed medical records of 151 patients undergoing oral cancer surgery in the period from 2006 to 2018.

The authors identified, through Value Stream Map, waste and inefficiencies during preoperative activities, consequently influencing preoperative LOS, considered the best performance indicator. The main causes were identified through the Ishikawa diagram, allowing reflection on possible solutions. The main corrective action was the introduction of the pre-hospitalization service. A comparative statistical analysis showed the significance of the solutions implemented. The average preoperative LOS decreased from 4.90 to 3.80 days (−22.40%) with a p-value of 0.001.

The methodology allowed to highlight the improvement of the patient hospitalization process with the introduction of the pre-hospitalization service. Therefore, by adopting the culture of continuous improvement, the flow of hospitalization was redrawn. The benefits of the solutions implemented are addressed to the patient in terms of lower LOS and greater service satisfaction and to the hospital for lower patient management costs and improved process quality. This article will be useful for those who need examples on how to apply Lean tools in healthcare.

The purpose of this study is to critically synthesize and integrate conceptual and empirical research on the behavioral perspective on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and explain why it is useful and necessary, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors explain why CSR can result in both positive and negative outcomes and provide future research directions and recommendations for practice and policymaking.

This study focuses on critical literature review and synthesis.

CSR policies in response to COVID-19 are created by organizations but are implemented by individual employees. The way employees perceive and react to CSR actions are key determinants of CSR’s implementation and success. CSR can be embedded within or peripheral to a firm’s core functioning. While embedded CSR is linked to several positive outcomes if correctly implemented together with employees, peripheral CSR is linked to “the dark side” of CSR and can result in negative employee outcomes.

Using the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors detail types of CSR actions that governments and organizations can implement and their relative effectiveness; why “one size fits all” top-down CSR does not work; how firms can use human resource management practices to re-engage employees through finding meaning in work; and the “dark side” of CSR.

Using the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors detail types of CSR actions that governments and organizations can implement and their relative effectiveness; why “one size fits all” top-down CSR does not work; how firms can use human resource management practices to re-engage employees through finding meaning in work; and the “dark side” of CSR.

CSR research has focused mostly on why and when firms choose to engage in CSR. A behavioral perspective on CSR facilitates, through an employee-centric conceptual framework, a deeper understanding of when and why employee reactions lead to positive and unintended negative outcomes, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sintetizamos críticamente e integramos la investigación conceptual y empírica sobre la perspectiva conductual de la responsabilidad social corporativa (RSC) y explicamos por qué es útil y necesaria, especialmente a raíz de la pandemia del COVID-19. Explicamos por qué la RSC puede dar lugar a resultados tanto positivos como negativos y sugerimos propuestas para investigaciones futuras y recomendaciones para la práctica empresarial y la formulación de políticas.

Revisión crítica y síntesis de literatura.

Las políticas de RSC en respuesta a COVID-19 son creadas por organizaciones, pero implementadas por empleados. La forma en que los empleados perciben y reaccionan a las iniciativas de RSC es clave para la implementación y el éxito de la RSC. La RSC puede integrarse o ser periférica al funcionamiento central de una empresa. Si bien la RSC integrada está vinculada a varios resultados positivos si se implementa correctamente junto a los empleados, la RSC periférica está vinculada al “lado oscuro” de la RSC y puede generar resultados negativos para los empleados.

La investigación de la RSC se ha centrado principalmente en cuándo y por qué las empresas eligen participar en la RSC. Una perspectiva conductual de la RSC facilita, a través de un marco conceptual centrado en los empleados, una comprensión más profunda de cuándo y por qué las reacciones de los empleados a la RSC conducen tanto a resultados positivos como a resultados negativos no deseados, especialmente durante la pandemia de COVID-19.

Utilizando el telón de fondo de la pandemia de COVID-19, detallamos (1) los tipos de acciones de RSC que los gobiernos y las organizaciones pueden implementar y su relativa efectividad; (2) por qué la RSC de arriba hacia abajo y de “talla única” no funciona; (3) cómo las empresas pueden utilizar las prácticas de gestión de recursos humanos para volver a involucrar a los empleados mediante la búsqueda de significado en el trabajo; y (4) el “lado oscuro” de la RSC.

Sintetizamos e integramos criticamente a pesquisa empírica e conceitual sobre a perspectiva comportamental da responsabilidade social corporativa (RSC) e explicamos por que ela é útil e necessária, especialmente após a pandemia do COVID-19. Explicamos por que a RSC pode levar a resultados positivos e negativos e sugerimos propostas para pesquisas futuras e recomendações para práticas de negócios e formulação de políticas.

Revisão crítica e síntese da literatura.

As políticas de RSC em resposta ao COVID-19 são criadas por organizações, mas implementadas pelos funcionários. O modo como os funcionários percebem e reagem às iniciativas de RSC é a chave para a implementação e o sucesso da RSC. A RSC pode ser integrada ou periférica à operação central de uma empresa. Enquanto a RSC integrada está vinculada a vários resultados positivos se implementado corretamente junto com os funcionários, a RSC periférica está vinculada ao “lado sombrio” da RSC e pode levar a resultados negativos para os funcionários.

A pesquisa em RSC se concentrou principalmente em quando e por que as empresas optam por participar da RSC. Uma perspectiva comportamental da RSC fornece, através de uma estrutura conceitual centrada no funcionário, uma compreensão mais profunda de quando e por que as reações dos funcionários à RSC levam a resultados negativos positivos e indesejados,especialmente durante a pandemia de COVID-19.

Usando o pano de fundo da pandemia do COVID-19, detalhamos (1) os tipos de ações de RSC que governos e organizações podem implementar e sua relativa eficácia; (2) por que a RSC de cima para baixo e tamanho único não funciona; (3) como as empresas podem usar as práticas de gerenciamento de recursos humanos para reativar os funcionários buscando significado no trabalho; e (4) o “lado sombrio” da RSC.