Search results

Purpose – This chapter argues that the concept of agility is an effective robust framework for designing sustainable health care systems.

Design/methodology/approach – This case study of Alegent Health was based on 7 years of data collection. It includes observations of meetings, large-group interventions, and other activities; site visits to different hospitals in the system to observe changes in practice; interviews with Alegent Health executives, primary care physicians, hospital presidents, specialist physicians and physician groups, and health systems staff and nurses; and a variety of archival data including meeting minutes, video tapes, conference proceedings, and web site material.

Findings – The Alegent Health system has evolved over time according to the principles of agility. It built a series of new capabilities that contribute to improved clinical outcomes, sustained financial results, and more socially and ecologically responsible results. Designing health care systems based on agility is a more effective and sustainable approach than relying on legislative or other criteria.

Originality/value – The discussion of sustainability in health care has focused primarily on specific projects or how to respond to specific technological, regulatory, or clinical changes. Alegent Health's experience provides important lessons, opportunities, and challenges that can help advance our understanding of effective health care and use organizational agility to create more sustainable health care systems. This chapter provides health care system administrators an alternative design option.

The research analyzes good practices in health care “management experimentation models,” which fall within the broader range of the integrative public–private partnerships (PPPs). Introduced by the Italian National Healthcare System in 1991, the “management experimentation models” are based on a public governance system mixed with a private management approach, a patient-centric orientation, a shared financial risk, and payment mechanisms correlated with clinical outcomes, quality, and cost-savings. This model makes public hospitals more competitive and efficient without affecting the principles of universal coverage, solidarity, and equity of access, but requires higher financial responsibility for managers and more flexibility in operations.

In Italy the experience of such experimental models is limited but successful. The study adopts the case study methodology and refers to the international collaboration started in 1997 between two Italian hospitals and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC – Pennsylvania, USA) in the field of organ transplants and biomedical advanced therapies.

The research allows identifying what constitutes good management practices and factors associated with higher clinical performance. Thus, it allows to understand whether and how the management experimentation model can be implemented on a broader basis, both nationwide and internationally. However, the implementation of integrative PPPs requires strategic, cultural, and managerial changes in the way in which a hospital operates; these transformations are not always sustainable.

The recognition of ISMETT’s good management practices is useful for competitive benchmarking among hospitals specialized in organ transplants and for its insights on the strategies concerning the governance reorganization in the hospital setting. Findings can be used in the future for analyzing the cross-country differences in productivity among well-managed public hospitals.

The emergence of an evidence-based medicine logic represents a major change in the large and complex field of American healthcare. In this analytical case study, the authors show that the intellectual school of evidence-based medicine became an important meso-structure that facilitated the growth of the new logic in American healthcare. The new intellectual school was a community of scholars who generated shared rules and resources through intergenerational mentoring. The school engaged in advocacy to advance new intellectual paradigms for conceptualizing healthcare quality that, when connected with material practices in the field of American healthcare, came to form a new institutional logic.

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) has broadened their campaign focus to include protecting hospital patients from five million incidents of medical harm through 2008. A critical component of this campaign is the engagement of governance in the process, noting evidence of better patient outcomes for hospitals with governing boards that spend at least 25% of their time on quality and safety. St. Francis Medical Center (SFMC), a 384-bed hospital in Southeast Los Angeles serving a high number of uninsured and underinsured patients and a population characterized by significant poverty, has initiated through a top-down approach, an aggressive plan to improve the care at its facilities through a call to action by its board of directors. In this article innovative methods are shared, tools are provided, and the initial positive results achieved are reported which show how a cultural change is occurring regarding quality and patient safety (QPS) at this hospital's organizational and delivery system level.

Workplace voice is well-established and encompasses behaviors such as prosocial voice, informal complaints, grievance filing, and whistleblowing, and it focuses on interactions between the employee and supervisor or the employee and the organizational collective. In contrast, our chapter focuses on employee prosocial advocacy voice (PAV), which the authors define as prosocial voice behaviors aimed at preventing harm or promoting constructive changes by advocating on behalf of others. In the context of a healthcare organization, low quality and unsafe patient care are salient and objectionable states in which voice can motivate actions on behalf of the patient to improve information exchanges, governance, and outreach activities for safer outcomes. The authors draw from the theory and research on responsibility to intersect with theories on information processing, accountability, and stakeholders that operate through voice between the employee-patient, employee-coworker, and employee-profession, respectively, to propose a model of PAV in patient-centered healthcare. The authors complete the model by suggesting intervening influences and barriers to PAV that may affect patient-centered outcomes.

To underscore the significance of international health care management, we focus on three themes: the problem of global blindness; global health care challenges and opportunities; and learning from international health care management. The problem of global blindness highlights how health care managers’ inattentional blindness to competitors’ operational performance and market strategies lead to avoidable and expensive failures. To address global challenges and opportunities, health care organizations are employing two different strategies: (1) building and marketing a world-class health care facility internationally, and (2) organizing and integrating multinational health care operations. The first strategy exploits the medical-tourism market. The second strategy requires either multinational health care networks or transnational health care organizations. One of the lessons to be learned from international health care management is that an organization can create a meta-national competitive advantage. Another lesson is that by examining best practices from around the world, health care organizations can obtain new insights and become more innovative within their home markets. A corollary and third lesson is that while health care organizations can learn a great deal from examining international best clinical practices, sometimes the most important management lessons are lost in clinical translations. The fourth and last lesson is that worst cases – serious international management failures – offer perhaps the most valuable insights into the role of culture, complexity, and leadership for health care organizations.

In this chapter, we identify three distinct transformational performance improvement (TPI) approaches commonly used to redesign work processes in health care organizations. We describe the unique components or tools that each approach uses to improve the delivery of health services. We also summarize what is empirically known about the effectiveness of each TPI approach according to systematic reviews and recent studies published in the peer-reviewed literature. Based on examination of this research, we discuss what knowledge is still needed to strengthen the evidence for whole system transformation. This involves the use of conceptual frameworks to assess and guide implementation efforts, and facilitators and barriers to change as revealed in a recent evaluation of one major initiative, the Lean Enterprise Transformation (LET) at the Veterans Health Administration. The analysis suggests ways in which TPI facilitators can be developed and barriers reduced to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of quality initiatives. Finally, we discuss appropriate study designs to evaluate TPI interventions that may strengthen the evidence for their effectiveness in real world practice settings.

The voluntary hospital trustee has traditionally seen issues of medical care, including those of patient safety, as falling within the delegated sphere of the medical staff. This customary distancing of the trustee from direct involvement in patient safety issues is now challenged by unprecedented scrutiny of hospital safety results through voluntary disclosure or mandatory public reporting. This new climate, fostered by the Institute of Medicine's To Err is Human and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's 100,000 Lives campaign, has complicated the role of the trustee in satisfying the traditional “prudent person” test for meeting fiduciary obligation as the trustee's breadth of involvement expands. Viewed theoretically, Mintzberg models the hospital as a case of a professional bureaucracy, in which the professional staff is responsible for standard setting and regulation. This traditional role of the professional staff is potentially assumed by others lacking technical background. Trustees are now asked to examine reports identifying physician compliance in attaining safety standards without education in the practice supporting those standards. Physician board members, whose numbers have increased in the past decade, are often sought to take the lead on interpretation of patient safety standards and results. The very public nature of patient safety reporting and its reflection on the reputation of the organization for which the trustee is ultimately accountable create a new level of tension and workload that challenges the dominant voluntary model of trusteeship in the United States health system.

This paper analyzes health care as a context for building value through human capital and culture. We examine how health care managers can nurture a favorable culture for providers enabling them to focus on customer service. A case study of a large medical center examines how organization culture affects clinicians versus support and managerial staff while adversely impacting patient satisfaction and organizational costs associated with turnover and the cost of replacing personnel. An agenda for managing internal customers and organization culture is presented.

Performance management (PM) has been developed to a central part of health care reforms. However, ideas of performance are traditionally contested in the health care sector and split up between a professional and a bureaucratic understanding of effective service delivery. With the rise of New Public Management, an additional layer of PM instruments has been put on the already existing structures. As a result, different PM regimes can be distinguished, which vary in the way they define performance, blame underperformance and design accountability instruments to ensure appropriate behaviour. The paper investigates the institutional design of PM schemes of three different cases – Denmark, Germany and England – which are representative for different PM regimes.