Search results

Networked forms of organizing in health care are increasingly viewed as an effective means of addressing “wicked”, multifaceted health and societal challenges. This is because networks attempt to address these challenges via collaborative approaches in which diverse stakeholders together define the problem(s) and implement solutions. Consequently, there has been a sharp increase in the number and types of networks used in health care. Despite this growth, our understanding of how these networks are governed has not kept pace. The purpose of this chapter is to chart a research agenda for scholars who are interested in studying health care network governance (i.e., the systems of rules and decision-making within networks), which is of particular importance in deliberate networks between organizations. We do so based on our knowledge of the literature and interviews with subject matter experts, both of which are used to identify core network governance concepts that represent gaps in our current knowledge. Our analysis identified various conceptualizations of networks and of their governance, as well as four primary knowledge gaps: “bread and butter” studies of network governance in health care, the role of single organizations in managing health care networks, governance through the life-cycle stages of health care networks, and governing across the multiple levels of health care networks. We first seek to provide some conceptual clarity around networks and network governance. Subsequently, we describe some of the challenges that researchers may confront while addressing the associated knowledge gaps and potential ways to overcome these challenges.

This chapter examines why managed clinical networks are an appropriate approach to sustainable healthcare, and discusses the conditions for the effectiveness of these multi-stakeholder, clinician-led modes of organizing. It describes the development of a national clinical network to achieve system-wide improvement in the provision of publicly funded cardiac surgery services in New Zealand, and the subsequent evolution of a broader network encompassing the whole cardiac care patient pathway.

The case study of the two cardiac clinical networks focuses on the emergence and evolution of the networks over a four-year period from 2009. Data were collected from interviews with key stakeholders of both networks and from internal and published documentary evidence. Analysis of the case study is informed by network theory and prior studies of managed clinical networks.

Progress made towards the achievement of the goals of the initial cardiac surgery network encouraged a broadening of focus to the entire cardiac care pathway and the establishment of the national cardiac network. An important benefit has been the learning and increase in understanding among the different stakeholders involved. Both clinical networks have demonstrated the value of clinician engagement and leadership in improving the delivery of health services, and serve as a best practice model for the development of further clinical networks for health services that require a national population base.

The case study analysis of the two cardiac clinical networks identifies five mutually reinforcing themes that underpin network effectiveness: network structure, management and governance, and internal and external legitimation. These themes encompass a number of factors suggestive of successful managed clinical networks, and offer insights into the use of such networks in organizing for sustainable healthcare.

At the beginning of the 21st century, multiple and diverse social entities, including the public (consumers), private and nonprofit healthcare institutions, government (public health) and other industry sectors, began to recognize the limitations of the current fragmented healthcare system paradigm. Primary stakeholders, including employers, insurance companies, and healthcare professional organizations, also voiced dissatisfaction with unacceptable health outcomes and rising costs. Grand challenges and wicked problems threatened the viability of the health sector. American health systems responded with innovations and advances in healthcare delivery frameworks that encouraged shifts from intra- and inter-sector arrangements to multi-sector, lasting relationships that emphasized patient centrality along with long-term commitments to sustainability and accountability. This pathway, leading to a population health approach, also generated the need for transformative business models. The coproduction of health framework, with its emphasis on cross-sector alignments, nontraditional partner relationships, sustainable missions, and accountability capable of yielding return on investments, has emerged as a unique strategy for facing disruptive threats and challenges from nonhealth sector corporations. This chapter presents a coproduction of health framework, goals and criteria, examples of boundary spanning network alliance models, and operational (integrator, convener, aggregator) strategies. A comparison of important organizational science theories, including institutional theory, network/network analysis theory, and resource dependency theory, provides suggestions for future research directions necessary to validate the utility of the coproduction of health framework as a precursor for paradigm change.

This chapter examines the case studies in this volume with a focus on concepts and methods used in the study of multi-organization networks and partnerships, motivations to join in multi-party collaboration, how multi-organization collaborations organized and managed, what kinds of value are created by collaborations, and the role of leadership therein.

A comparative look at four vertical networks (in health care and education); two “issue” networks/partnerships (sustainable seafood and water use); and the roles of government in collaboration in horizontal, vertical, and issue-based arrangements.

The chapter describes “lessons” learned about building both sustainability and collaborative capabilities in and across partnering organizations and about improving partnership structures, processes, and results.

The chapter sums and synthesizes the volume’s contributions.

The purpose of this chapter is to use sociological theory and research to develop an explanation for how chronic illnesses are managed at home and to thereby suggest some ways in which a sociological perspective can be applied to improve health care for persons with chronic illnesses. Self-care illness management is crucial to the prevention of and reduction of morbidity and mortality from chronic illness.

Review and synthesis of research literature.

Sociological research and theory suggest two important insights that should inform health care services aimed at improving self-care; chronic illness care occurs in the context of the household, neighborhood, and community and, therefore, the “patient” (i.e., the object of health services) is really the caregiving social network around the patient, and because the risk of chronic illness and the resources available to deal with it are socially (and unequally) distributed, “health care” interventions need to take account of disparities in risks and resources that will affect the patient’s ability to successfully comply with self-care regimens.

The review does not include an examination of the clinical research literature. It does, however, suggest that sociologists need to explicitly study chronic illness and health care related to it.

The chapter links the long history of research on family caregiving to the concern with the success of self-management of chronic illness. It also links concerns about that success to social disparities in the distribution of social resources and hence to morbidity and mortality disparities.

This chapter reports on an action research case study of integrated obstetric care in the Netherlands. Efficient and patient-friendly patient flows through integrated care networks are of major societal importance. How to design and develop such interorganizational patient flows is still a nascent research area, especially when dealing with a large number (n>3) of stakeholders. We have shown that a modification of an existing method to support interorganizational collaboration by system dynamics-based group model building (GMB) (the Renga method, Akkermans, 2001) may be effective in achieving such collaboration.

In this chapter, I study athlete activism as practices of collective care in the context of football communities in Kerala, India. This particular collective is formed through a network of football players, fans, organizers of tournaments, team managers, and families of these actors. I look at these practices through two different yet interconnected “events.” One event is the public discussion of a form of care represented in the Malayalam movie titled Sudani from Nigeria (2018). The movie shows the acts of care centered on the mothers of a local football team manager and an African player who plays for a local team in Malabar. The other event that I seek to study is a campaign not yet fully articulated nor has generated significant discussions in the public sphere possibly because of its emerging nature. A local team manager organized a campaign during the initial months of the COVID-19 lockdown to facilitate the safe return of African players in the Malabar tournament circuit. The campaign led to the establishment of a network of care that is invested in the welfare of migrant athletes. Through these two events, I will look at what constitutes athlete activism at a translocal level in South India. I argue that such practices of care reconstitute the relationships among the people across the region as well as the people's relationship with the state. These practices of care recognize the inequalities in terms of race, class, and nationality and encourage action toward social change.

The purpose of this chapter is to examine how leaders furthered the development of a social enterprise in response to paradoxes. Data on leadership practices were collected through interviews and observations in an Italian Healthcare network over the organization’s first two years. The data indicate that leaders addressed paradoxes in developing several critical resources by using both top-down influence and bottom-up participation. Leaders used top-down practices to further organizational development along a known path when they could leverage technical expertise or a vision to address a source of tension. Bottom-up practices, on the other hand, permitted the discovery of new paths that had not been previously identified. Leaders leveraged such responses where tensions appeared intractable. Implications for managers and organizational development and change practitioners are discussed.

Researchers recommend a reorganization of the medical profession into larger groups with a multispecialty mix. We analyze whether there is evidence for the superiority of these models and if this organizational transformation is underway.

We summarize the evidence on scale and scope economies in physician group practice, and then review the trends in physician group size and specialty mix to conduct survivorship tests of the most efficient models.

The distribution of physician groups exhibits two interesting tails. In the lower tail, a large percentage of physicians continue to practice in small, physician-owned practices. In the upper tail, there is a small but rapidly growing percentage of large groups that have been organized primarily by non-physician owners.

While our analysis includes no original data, it does collate all known surveys of physician practice characteristics and group practice formation to provide a consistent picture of physician organization.

Our review suggests that scale and scope economies in physician practice are limited. This may explain why most physicians have retained their small practices.

Larger, multispecialty groups have been primarily organized by non-physician owners in vertically integrated arrangements. There is little evidence supporting the efficiencies of such models and some concern they may pose anticompetitive threats.

This is the first comprehensive review of the scale and scope economies of physician practice in nearly two decades. The research results do not appear to have changed much; nor has much changed in physician practice organization.