Search results

Healthcare tribalism refers to the phenomenon through which different groups in a healthcare setting strictly adhere to their profession-based silo, within which they exhibit stereotypical behaviours. In turn, this can lead to deleterious downstream effects upon productivity and care delivered to patients. This study highlights a clinician-led governance model, implemented at a National Health Service (NHS) trust, to investigate whether it successfully overcame tribalism and helped drive innovation.

This was a convergent mixed-methods study including qualitative and quantitative data collected in parallel. Qualitative data included 27 semi-structured interviews with representatives from four professional groups. Quantitative data were collected through a verbally administered survey and scored on a 10-point scale.

The trust arranged its services under five autonomous business units, with a clinician and a manager sharing the leadership role at each unit. According to interviewees replies, this equivalent authority was cascaded down and enabled breaking down professional siloes, which in turn aided in the adoption of an innovative clinical model restructure.

This study contributes to the literature by characterizing a real-world example in which healthcare tribalism was mitigated while reflecting on the advantages yielded as a result.

Previous studies from all over the world identified major differences in the perspectives of different healthcare professional groups. In the United Kingdom, clinicians largely felt cut off from decision-making and dissatisfied with their managerial role. The study findings explain a governance model that allowed harmony and inclusion of different professions. Given the long-standing strains on healthcare systems worldwide, stakeholders can leverage the study findings for guidance in developing and implementing innovative managerial approaches.

Research in psychology or management science has shown that shared leadership (SL) enhances information sharing, fosters participation and empowers team members within the decision-making processes, ultimately improving the quality of performance outcomes. Little has been done and, thus, less is known of the value and use of SL in acute healthcare teams. The purpose of this study is to (1) explore, identify and critically assess patterns and behaviour of SL in acute healthcare teams; and (2) evaluate to what extent SL may benefit and accomplish safer care in acute patient treatment and healthcare delivery.

The authors conducted a review that followed the PRISMA-P reporting guidelines. A variety of sources were searched in April 2018 for studies containing primary research that focused on SL in acute healthcare teams. The outcome of interest was a well-specified assessment of SL, and an evaluation of the extent SL may enhance team performance, lead to safer patient care and healthcare delivery in acute healthcare teams.

After the study selection process, 11 out of 1,383 studies were included in the review. Studies used a qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods approach. Emerging themes based on behavioural observations that contributed to SL were: shared mental model; social support and situational awareness; and psychological safety. High-performing teams showed more SL behaviour, teams with less seniority displayed more traditional leadership styles and SL was associated with increased team satisfaction.

Evidence to date suggests that SL may be of benefit to improve performance outcomes in acute healthcare team settings. However, the discrepancy of SL assessments within existing studies and their small sample sizes highlights the need for a large, good quality randomized controlled trial to validate this indication.

Although studies have acknowledged the relevance of SL in healthcare service and delivery, a systematic, evidence-based and robust evaluation of behavioural patterns and the benefits of SL in this field is still missing.