Search results

Public sectors have responded to grand societal challenges by establishing collaboratives – new inter-organizational partnerships to secure better quality health services. In the UK, a proliferation of collaboration-based healthcare networks exists that could help to enhance the value of investments in quality improvement programs. The nature and organizational form of such improvements is still a subject of debate within the public-sector literature. Place-based collaboration has been proposed as a possible solution. In response, the purpose of this study is to present the results and findings of a place-based collaborative network, highlighting challenges and insights.

This study adopted a social constructionist epistemological approach, using a qualitative methodology. A single case study was used and data collected in three different stages over a two-year period.

The study finds that leadership, data-enabled learning through system-wide training and development, and the provision of an enabling environment that is facilitated by an academic partner, can go a long way in the managing of healthcare networks for improving quality.

Regardless of the tensions and challenges with place-based networks, they could still be a solution in maximizing the public value required by government investments in the healthcare sector, as they offer a more innovative structure that can help to address complex issues beyond the remit of hierarchical structures. This study is limited by the use of a single case study.

Across countries health systems are moving away from markets to collaborative models for healthcare delivery and from individual services to population-based approaches. This study provides insights to inform leaders of collaborative health models in the design and delivery of these new collaborations.

As demand rises (as a result of increasing complexity and demographics) in the western world, health systems are seeking to redefine the boundaries between health service provision and community self-reliance and resilience. This study provides insights into the new partnership between health institutions and communities, providing opportunities for more social- and solidarity-based healthcare models which place patients and the public at the heart of change.

The city place-based network is the first of such organizational form in healthcare collaboration in the UK.

This paper explores innovation adoption in inter-organizational healthcare networks. The authors develop theoretical speculations to investigate better the role of artificial intelligence (AI) as an innovative tool to improve buyer-supplier relationships, creating better performance outcomes.

The research is based on a theoretical investigation aiming at exploring the role of AI-based solutions for managing buyer-supplier relationships. The conceptual approach allows us to identify some research streams (e.g. co-working collaborations in supply chain management) by proposing a matrix that helps clarify the analysis's directions.

The results show the importance of AI that can help the operator in accessing supplier information, including current prices, available stocks, and delivery status, thereby reducing the risk of information asymmetry. AI is intended not only as a technology tool but also as an innovative solution to promote business relationships and support vertical alliances through the value chain between buyer and supplier.

This paper can help healthcare actors examine the choices behind their operational strategies by providing transparency of the activities and availability of information in real-time. Finally, our study reflects the future directions to enhance the cooperation and innovation adoption among healthcare operators.

Neo-liberal “reform” has in many countries shifted services across the boundary between the public and private sector. This policy re-opens the question of what structural and managerial differences, if any, differences of ownership make to healthcare providers. The purpose of this paper is to examine the connections between ownership, organisational structure and managerial regime within an elaboration of Donabedian’s reasoning about organisational structures. Using new data from England, it considers: how do the internal managerial regimes of differently owned healthcare providers differ, or not? In what respects did any such differences arise from differences in ownership or for other reasons?

An observational systematic qualitative comparison of differently owned providers was the strongest feasible research design. The authors systematically compared a maximum variety (by ownership) sample of community health services; out-of-hours primary care; and hospital planned orthopaedics and ophthalmology providers (n=12 cases). The framework of comparison was the ownership theory mentioned above.

The connection between ownership (on the one hand) and organisation structures and managerial regimes (on the other) differed at different organisational levels. Top-level governance structures diverged by organisational ownership and objectives among the case-study organisations. All the case-study organisations irrespective of ownership had hierarchical, bureaucratic structures and managerial regimes for coordinating everyday service production, but to differing extents. In doctor-owned organisations, the doctors’, but not other occupations’, work was controlled and coordinated in a more-or-less democratic, self-governing ways.

This study was empirically limited to just one sector in one country, although within that sector the case-study organisations were typical of their kinds. It focussed on formal structures, omitting to varying extents other technologies of power and the differences in care processes and patient experiences within differently owned organisations.

Type of ownership does appear, overall, to make a difference to at least some important aspects of an organisation’s governance structures and managerial regime. For the broader field of health organisational research, these findings highlight the importance of the owners’ agency in explaining organisational change. The findings also call into question the practice of copying managerial techniques (and “fads”) across the public–private boundary.

Ownership does make important differences to healthcare providers’ top-level governance structures and accountabilities and to work coordination activity, but with different patterns at different organisational levels. These findings have implications for understanding the legitimacy, governance and accountability of healthcare organisations, the distribution and use power within them, and system-wide policy interventions, for instance to improve care coordination and for the correspondingly required foci of healthcare organisational research.

This paper explores the Adoption of Technological Innovation (ATI) in the healthcare industry. It investigates how the literature has evolved, and what are the emerging innovation dimensions in the healthcare industry adoption studies.

We followed a mixed-method approach combining bibliometric methods and topic modeling, with 57 papers being deeply analyzed.

Our results identify three latent topics. The first one is related to the digitalization in healthcare with a specific focus on the COVID-19 pandemic. The second one groups up the word combinations dealing with the research models and their constructs. The third one refers to the healthcare systems/professionals and their resistance to ATI.

The study’s sample selection focused on scientific journals included in the Academic Journal Guide and in the FT Research Rank. However, the paper identifies trends that offer managerial insights for stakeholders in the healthcare industry.

ATI has the potential to revolutionize the health service delivery system and to decentralize services traditionally provided in hospitals or medical centers. All this would contribute to a reduction in waiting lists and the provision of proximity services.

The originality of the paper lies in the combination of two methods: bibliometric analysis and topic modeling. This approach allowed us to understand the ATI evolutions in the healthcare industry.

Healthcare systems receive criticism from both providers and recipients. The diversity in these systems throughout the world makes innovation and change difficult. However, a structured analysis of healthcare systems is crucial to identify areas for improvement and to share best practices for the betterment of healthcare throughout the world.

The paper uses organizational theory as an unbiased tool for evaluating healthcare systems. This theory analyses healthcare systems across five dimensions: environment, culture, social structure, physical structure and technology. This analysis provides an in-depth understanding of the organization's surroundings, formation and function. It offers a lens through which healthcare systems can be envisioned and establishes a vocabulary for communication.

Organizational theory presents a multifaceted approach to initiate assessments aiming to enhance existing healthcare systems and customize them to serve all stakeholders within the focused ecosystem. It alters the dynamics of criticism and presents an opportunity to sustainably address unforeseen healthcare challenges in the future. As the author proceeds to understand healthcare organizations through the perspective of organizational theory, the author also uncovers subtle yet crucial issues such as resource dependence, cultural clashes, organizational silence, bureaucracy, hierarchy, ethics, values, engagement and burnout.

This paper was crafted from a collaborative paper for the final of a master's degree. A collaboration was conceptualized using organisation theory as the tool to align processes and achieve successful outcome. The narrative of the collaboration has been edited and paper presented highlighting the importance of the tool of organisation theory in healthcare systems.

Decision-making, reinforced by artificial intelligence (AI), is predicted to become potent tool within the domain of supply chain management. Considering the importance of this subject, the purpose of this study is to explore the triggers and technological inhibitors affecting the adoption of AI. This study also aims to identify three-dimensional triggers, notably those linked to environmental, social, and governance (ESG), as well as technological inhibitors.

Drawing upon a six-step systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a broad range of journal publications was recognized, with a thematic analysis under the lens of the ESG framework, offering a unique perspective on factors triggering and inhibiting AI adoption in the supply chain.

In the environmental dimension, triggers include product waste reduction and greenhouse gas emissions reduction, highlighting the potential of AI in promoting sustainability and environmental responsibility. In the social dimension, triggers encompass product security and quality, as well as social well-being, indicating how AI can contribute to ensuring safe and high-quality products and enhancing societal welfare. In the governance dimension, triggers involve agile and lean practices, cost reduction, sustainable supplier selection, circular economy initiatives, supply chain risk management, knowledge sharing and the synergy between supply and demand. The inhibitors in the technological category present challenges, encompassing the lack of regulations and rules, data security and privacy concerns, responsible and ethical AI considerations, performance and ethical assessment difficulties, poor data quality, group bias and the need to achieve synergy between AI and human decision-makers.

Despite the use of PRISMA guidelines to ensure a comprehensive search and screening process, it is possible that some relevant studies in other databases and industry reports may have been missed. In light of this, the selected studies may not have fully captured the diversity of triggers and technological inhibitors. The extraction of themes from the selected papers is subjective in nature and relies on the interpretation of researchers, which may introduce bias.

The research contributes to the field by conducting a comprehensive analysis of the diverse factors that trigger or inhibit AI adoption, providing valuable insights into their impact. By incorporating the ESG protocol, the study offers a holistic evaluation of the dimensions associated with AI adoption in the supply chain, presenting valuable implications for both industry professionals and researchers. The originality lies in its in-depth examination of the multifaceted aspects of AI adoption, making it a valuable resource for advancing knowledge in this area.

Despite the abundance of research in open innovation, few contributions explore it at inter-organizational level, and particularly with a focus on healthcare ecosystem, characterized by a dense network of relationships among public and private organizations (hospitals, companies and universities) as well as other actors that can be labeled as “untraditional” player, i.e. doctors, nurses and patients. The purpose of this paper is to cover this gap and explore how knowledge is transferred and flows among all the healthcare ecosystems’ players in order to support open innovation processes.

The paper is conceptual in nature and adopts a narrative literature review approach. In particular, insights gathered from open innovation literature at the inter-organizational network level, with a particular attention to healthcare ecosystems, and from the knowledge transfer processes, are analyzed in order to propose an interpretative framework for the understanding of knowledge transfer in open innovation with a focus on healthcare ecosystem.

The paper proposes an original interpretative framework for knowledge transfer to support open innovation in healthcare ecosystems, composed of four main components: healthcare ecosystem’s players’ categories; knowledge flows among different categories of players along the exploration and exploitation stages of innovation development; players’ motivations for open innovation; and players’ positions in the innovation process. In addition, assuming the intermediary network as the suitable organizational model for healthcare ecosystem, four classification scenarios are identified on the basis of the main players’ influence degree and motivations for open innovation.

The paper offers interpretative lenses for managers and policy makers in understanding the most suitable organizational models able to encourage open innovation in healthcare ecosystems, taking into consideration the players’ motivation and the knowledge transfer processes on the basis of the innovation results.

The paper introduces a novel framework that fills a gap in the innovation management literature, by pointing out the key role of external not R&D players, like patients, involved in knowledge transfer for open innovation processes in healthcare ecosystems.

The purpose of this paper is to put forward a theoretical model grounded in the literature that identifies a number of antecedent conditions associated with network commitment.

Based upon empirical data gathered from formal healthcare networks in the UK, findings are presented that suggest different forms of commitment within networks may have opposite effects on network performance.

This paper argues that commitment may play a significant role specifically associated with determining performance outcomes in networks. In so doing a theoretical model is put forward drawn from the literature to suggest possible antecedent conditions associated with commitment at the inter‐organisational level.

To date few studies have been undertaken to examine the antecedents of commitment within networks. More importantly, the recognition of commitment as a multi‐dimensional construct within networks has yet to have informed understanding of the role commitment may play at the inter‐organisational level.

This study focuses on the reasons leading health organisations to adopt a cooperation strategy and the benefits they can draw from that inter-organisational relation.

To this end, a mixed research approach – qualitative and quantitative – was adopted, taking a real case between a Health Centre Group in inland Portugal (ACeS-CB) and the Faculty of Health Sciences at a university situated in the same region (FCS-UBI). To gather information, a questionnaire survey was directed to medical students in this faculty, together with semi-structured interviews with those in charge of both types of organisation in the inter-organisational cooperation studied here.

After content analysis of the interviews and descriptive analysis of the questionnaires, it was concluded that this cooperation is based on a relation of a formal nature, as each organisation is independent from the other, as are their administrative and management organs. The benefits obtained from this cooperative relation regard mainly the share of human resources, particularly elements of the clinical staff in ACeS-CB who have taken on teaching duties at FCS-UBI.

Articulation of theoretical training with clinical practice and the exchange of knowledge were other benefits identified. The study also reveals that students perceive this inter-organisational cooperation as satisfactory, corresponding to what was defined by those in charge of the institutions as its main objectives.

This study focuses on the reasons leading health organisations to adopt a strategy of cooperation with other organisations in the same sector and the benefits they can obtain from that relation. It represents a tool to support managers in health organisations and other stakeholders in an inter-organisational cooperation relation, in planning strategies and understanding the impact of this type of cooperation.