Search results

Ecological systems comprise interdependent human and other living beings, along with their life-giving natural environments. The sustainability of such systems has become a critical global concern, both generally and in relation to business practice. This chapter considers the cultivation of care among business students as one important way of fostering engagement with such concern, with particular attention given to a specific and under-attended area in business research and practice: that of human sustainability. In order to overcome potential limitations of diverse and often disparate streams of research on care, this chapter considers Mayseless’ (2016) integrative framework for understanding caring motivation, and builds upon the four points of intervention for cultivating care that were articulated within that framework. Extant pedagogical research within business and management is used to elaborate additional insights and methods for developing caring skills, caring values, caring teaching and learning communities, and a more extensive vision of care that includes those who might be unknown, different from or distant to us. The framework, insights, methods, and examples discussed in this chapter provide a foundation that can help guide future care-related, ecologically focused pedagogical research and practice.

Recent reports by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) signal a substantial yet unrealized deficit in patient safety innovation and improvement. With the aim of reducing this dilemma, we provide an introductory account of clinical error resulting from poorly designed systems by reviewing the relevant health care, management, psychology, and organizational accident sciences literature. First, we discuss the concept of health care error and describe two approaches to analyze error proliferation and causation. Next, by applying transdisciplinary evidence and knowledge to health care, we detail the attributes fundamental to constructing safer health care systems as embedded components within the complex adaptive environment. Then, the Health Care Error Proliferation Model explains the sequence of events typically leading to adverse outcomes, emphasizing the role that organizational and external cultures contribute to error identification, prevention, mitigation, and defense construction. Subsequently, we discuss the critical contribution health care leaders can make to address error as they strive to position their institution as a high reliability organization (HRO). Finally, we conclude that the future of patient safety depends on health care leaders adopting a system philosophy of error management, investigation, mitigation, and prevention. This change is accomplished when leaders apply the basic organizational accident and health care safety principles within their respective organizations.

Purpose – This chapter provides a reflective synopsis of the chapters in the volume and highlights the learning from the cases about the development of new orientations, design configurations, and learning mechanisms. It charts directions for further research and possible managerial actions.

Design – The chapters in this second volume of the book series “Organizing for Sustainable Effectiveness” capture a rich set of cases in which organizing for sustainable health care was the central focus. Each chapter illuminated the development of a distinct health care system in a unique cultural and national context, and had a special focus on reporting theoretically informed and rigorously explored knowledge to guide purposeful design and learning approaches. Collectively the chapters highlighted the processes, organization and design, system regulation, and continuous learning approaches in complex organizational and multi-organizational health care systems that enable focus on and advancement of economic, social, and ecological outcomes.

Findings – Several critical themes have emerged from the cases, and from the broader literature on health care transformation: the importance of purpose; the need to overcome fragmentation; the need for alternative business models; technology as an investment in sustainable health care; the centrality of knowledge management; the importance of partnership and collaboration; the role of self-organization and leadership; and the criticality of building change capabilities.

The years following the 9/11/2001 terrorists attacks saw a marked increase in community and hospital emergency preparedness, from communications across community networks, development of policies and procedures, to attainment and training in the use of biological warfare resources. Regular drills ensured emergency and health care personnel were trained and prepared to address the next large-scale crisis, especially from terrorist and bioterrorist attacks. This chapter looks at some of the more familiar global health issues over the past two decades and the lessons learned from hospital responses to inform hospital management in preparation for future incidents.

This study is a narrative review of the literature related to lessons learned from four major events in the time period from 2002 to 2023 – SARS, MERS, Ebola, and COVID-19.

The initial search yielded 25,913 articles; 57 articles were selected for inclusion in the study.

Comparison of key issues and lessons learned among the four major events described in this article – SARS, MERS, Ebola, and COVID-19 – highlight that several lessons are “relearned” with each event. Other key issues, such as supply shortages, staffing availability, and hospital capacity to simultaneously provide care to noninfectious patients came to the forefront during the COVID-19 pandemic. A primary, ongoing concern for hospitals is how to maintain their preparedness given competing priorities, resources, and staff time. This concern remains post-COVID-19.

Since the publication of the report “To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System” by the US Institute of Medicine in 2000, much has changed with regard to patient safety. Many of the more recent initiatives to improve patient safety target the behavior of health care staff (e.g., training, double-checking procedures, and standard operating procedures). System-based interventions have so far received less attention, even though they produce more substantial improvements, being less dependent on individuals’ behavior. One type of system-based intervention that can benefit patient safety involves improvements to hospital design. Given that people’s working environments affect their behavior, good design at a systemic level not only enables staff to work more efficiently; it can also prevent errors and mishaps, which can have serious consequences for patients. While an increasing number of studies have demonstrated the effect of hospital design on patient safety, this knowledge is not easily accessible to clinicians, practitioners, risk managers, and other decision-makers, such as designers and architects of health care facilities. This is why the Swiss Patient Safety Foundation launched its project, “More Patient Safety by Design: Systemic Approaches for Hospitals,” which is presented in this chapter.

Changes in the physical environments of health care settings have become increasingly common to meet the evolving needs of the health care marketplace, new technologies, and infrastructure demands. Physical environment change takes many forms including new build construction, renovation of existing space, and relocation of units with little to no construction customization. The interrelated nature of the complex socio-technical health care system suggests that even small environmental modifications can result in system-level changes. Environmental modifications can lead to unintended consequences and introduce the potential for latent safety threats. Engaging users throughout the change lifecycle allows for iterative design and testing of system modifications. This chapter introduces a flexible process model, PROcess for the Design of User-Centered Environments (PRODUCE), designed to guide system change. The model was developed and refined across a series of real-world renovations and relocations in a large multihospital health care system. Utilizing the principles of user-centered design, human factors, and in-situ simulation, the model engages users in the planning, testing, and implementation of physical environment change. Case studies presented here offer exemplars of how to modify the model to support individual project objectives and outcomes to assess at each stage of the project.

The purpose of the study was to explore in literature what different leadership styles and behaviors of head nurses have a positive influence on the outcomes of patient safety or quality of care.

We reviewed the literature from January 2000 until September 2011. We searched Pubmed, Embase, Cinahl, Psychlit, and Econlit.

We found 10 studies addressing the relationship between head nurse leadership and safety and quality. A wide array of styles and practices were associated with different patient outcomes. Transformational leadership was the most used concept in the studies. A trend can be observed over these studies suggesting that a trustful relationship between the head nurse and subordinates is an important driving force for the achievement of positive patient outcomes. Furthermore, the effects of these trustful relationships seem to be amplified by supporting mechanisms, often objective conditions like clinical pathways and, especially, staffing level.

This study offers an up-to-date review of the limited number of studies on the relationship between nurse leadership and patient outcomes. Although mostly transformational leadership was found to be responsible for positive associations with outcomes, also contingent reward had positive influence on outcomes. We formulated some comments on the predominance of the transformational leadership concept and suggested the application of complexity theory and political leadership for the current context of care. We formulated some implications for practice and further research, mainly the need for more systematic empirical and cross cultural studies and the urgent need for the development of a validated set of nurse-sensitive patient outcome indicators.

Diffusion of innovations, defined as the adoption and implementation of new ideas, processes, products, or services in health care, is both particularly important and especially challenging. One known problem with adoption and implementation of new technologies is that, while organizations often make innovations immediately available, organizational actors are more wary about adopting new technologies because these may impact not only patients and practices but also reimbursement. As a result, innovations may remain underutilized, and organizations may miss opportunities to improve and advance. As innovation adoption is vital to achieving success and remaining competitive, it is important to measure and understand factors that impact innovation diffusion. Building on a survey of a national sample of 654 clinicians, our study measures the extent of diffusion of value-enhancing care delivery innovations (i.e., technologies that not only improve quality of care but has potential to reduce care cost by diminishing waste, Faems et al., 2010) for 13 clinical specialties and identifies healthcare-specific individual characteristics such as: professional purview, supervisory responsibility, financial incentive, and clinical tenure associated with innovation diffusion. We also examine the association of innovation diffusion with perceived value of one type of care delivery innovation – artificial intelligence (AI) – for assisting clinicians in their clinical work. Responses indicate that less than two-thirds of clinicians were knowledgeable about and aware of relevant value-enhancing care delivery innovations. Clinicians with broader professional purview, more supervisory responsibility, and stronger financial incentives had higher innovation diffusion scores, indicating greater knowledge and awareness of value-enhancing, care delivery innovations. Higher levels of knowledge of the innovations and awareness of their implementation were associated with higher perceptions of the value of AI-based technology. Our study contributes to our knowledge of diffusion of innovation in healthcare delivery and highlights potential mechanisms for speeding innovation diffusion.

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.