Interorganizational cooperation and decision making autonomy in a consortium multihospital system

K G Provan

Abstract:This paper discusses interorganizational relationships within one type of multihospital system, a consortium. Reasons for the development of this type of system are presented. Hypotheses are proposed explaining how the general strategic-level decisions of hospitals may be influenced as a result of consortium affiliation.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Hybrid Administrative Interfaces: Authority Delegation and Reversion in Strategic Alliances

Marvin Hanisch,Jeffrey J. Reuer,Carolin Haeussler,Shivaram V. Devarakonda

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1687

2023-08-12

Organization Science

Abstract:Steering committees are pivotal for governing complex collaborations by consensus to facilitate coordination and knowledge sharing. Although consensus-based governance promotes mutuality, it can also cause deadlocks, stalling expeditious decision making. We examine the conditions under which alliance partners delegate decision-making authority to steering committees as well as the conditions under which authority over discordant matters can be relocated to one of the alliance partners. We argue that joint coordination concerns increase the likelihood of authority delegation, whereas the higher costs and stakes associated with decision stalemates provide grounds for authority reversion. Empirical analyses of strategic alliances in the biopharmaceutical industry support our arguments. Our paper demonstrates the versatility of contractually defined administrative interfaces in alliance governance, allowing partners to coordinate bilaterally and adapt hierarchically as and when required.

management
Why do some inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work when others do not? A realist review

Justin Avery Aunger,Ross Millar,Joanne Greenhalgh,Russell Mannion,Anne-Marie Rafferty,Hugh McLeod

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01630-8

2021-03-22

Systematic Reviews

Abstract:Abstract Background Inter-organisational collaboration is increasingly prominent within contemporary healthcare systems. A range of collaboration types such as alliances, networks, and mergers have been proposed as a means to turnaround organisations, by reducing duplication of effort, enabling resource sharing, and promoting innovations. However, in practice, due to the complexity of the process, such efforts are often rife with difficulty. Notable contributions have sought to make sense of this area; however, further understanding is needed in order to gain a better understanding of why some inter-organisational collaborations work when others do not, to be able to more effectively implement collaborations in the future. Methods Realist review methodology was used with the intention of formulating context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) to explain how inter-organisational collaborations work and why, combining systematic and purposive literature search techniques. The systematic review encompassed searches for reviews, commentaries, opinion pieces, and case studies on HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Social Policy and Practice databases, and further searches were conducted using Google Scholar. Data were extracted from included studies according to relevance to the realist review. Results Fifty-three papers were included, informing the development of programme theories of how, why, and when inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work. Formulation of our programme theories incorporated the concepts of partnership synergy and collaborative inertia and found that it was essential to consider mechanisms underlying partnership functioning, such as building trust and faith in the collaboration to maximise synergy and thus collaborative performance. More integrative or mandated collaboration may lean more heavily on contract to drive collaborative behaviour. Conclusion As the first realist review of inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare as an intervention for improvement, this review provides actionable evidence for policymakers and implementers, enhancing understanding of mechanisms underlying the functioning and performing of inter-organisational collaborations, as well as how to configure the context to aid success. Next steps in this research will test the results against further case studies and primary data to produce a further refined theory. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019149009

medicine, general & internal
Collaboration among public organizations: a systematic literature review on determinants of interinstitutional performance

Lorenzo Costumato

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-03-2020-0069

2021-03-09

International Journal of Public Sector Management

Abstract:Purpose The concept of collaboration has received increased attention from scholars in public management, as it has been seen as a viable solution to address “wicked” problems. Solving such problems may require a horizontal collaboration within the same governmental jurisdiction or, vertically, between different levels of government. Despite broad interest from the field of public management, the dynamics of public interinstitutional collaboration have received little attention within the literature. This paper aims to provide a systematic overview of the most significant academic contributions on the topic, highlighting the features of this collaborative context and identifying determinants those can foster its performance. Design/methodology/approach In total, two main literature streams have occasionally dealt with public interinstitutional collaboration and related performance management: the “collaborative governance” stream and “public network performance”. Through a systematic literature review (SLR), this paper answers the following research question: what has been done and what is missing in order to assess performance in the context of public interinstitutional collaboration? Findings The findings of this study suggest that the most relevant papers are those dealing with public interagency collaboration, as this form of collaboration presents several similarities with public interinstitutional circumstances. Furthermore, the authors provide an analysis of the main determinants of public interinstitutional performance, which highlight the effects of trust, power sharing, leadership style, management strategies and formalization on the achievement of efficient and effective collaboration between public entities. Originality/value By drawing on two autonomous literature streams, this paper describes the main features of public interinstitutional collaboration. It contributes to the field by offering a systematic overview of how specific performance determinants, which are widely recognized as relevant for collaboration in general, work in the specificity of public–public contexts.

English Else
Working together? Organizational and market determinants of collaboration between public health and medical care providers

P K Halverson,G P Mays,A D Kaluzny

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.90.12.1913

Abstract:Objectives: This study examines organizational characteristics and market conditions likely to influence collaborative relationships between public health agencies and community medical care providers. Methods: Public health directors in 60 US counties were surveyed by telephone concerning their relationships with area community hospitals (n = 263) and community health centers (n = 85). Multivariate models were used to estimate the effects of organizational and market characteristics on collaboration. Results: Collaboration was reported among 55% of the hospitals and 64% of the health centers. Certain forms of collaboration were more likely in markets characterized by higher HMO penetration and lower HMO competition. Conclusions: Targeted efforts to facilitate collaboration may be required in settings where institutional and market incentives are lacking.
A life-cycle model of organizational federations: the case of hospitals

T A D'Aunno,H S Zuckerman

Abstract:Hospital federations are a form of multiorganizational collaboration in which a management group coordinates and directs the activities of three or more organizations. This paper introduces a life-cycle model of federations that focuses on factors that influence the transition from one stage to another.
Reasons for merging and collaborating in healthcare: Marriage or living apart together?

Wouter Schors,Anne‐Fleur Roos,Ron Kemp,Marco Varkevisser,Wouter van der Schors

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3695

2023-08-08

The International Journal of Health Planning and Management

Abstract:Background Across OECD countries, integration between healthcare organisations has become an indispensable part of contemporary healthcare provision. In recent years, inter‐organisational collaboration has increasingly been encouraged in health and competition policy at the expense of mergers. Yet, understanding of whether healthcare organisations make an active choice between merging and collaborating is lacking. Hence, this study systematically examines (i) healthcare executives' motives for integration, (ii) their potential trade‐offs between collaborating or merging, and (iii) the barriers to collaborating perceived by them. Methods Early 2019, an online questionnaire was conducted among a nationwide panel of 714 healthcare executives in the Netherlands. Because of their strategic position within healthcare organisations as end‐responsible managers, healthcare executives are especially suited to provide broad and in‐depth knowledge on the internal and external processes and decisions. Three hundred thirty‐seven Dutch healthcare executives completed the questionnaire (response rate 47%). This study sample was representative of the largest healthcare sectors in the Netherlands. In total, 137 mergers and 235 inter‐organisational collaborations were reported. Both closed questions and open‐ended questions were systematically analysed. Results Improving or broadening healthcare provision is the foremost motive for mergers as well as inter‐organisational collaborations. When considering both types, reducing governance complexity is one of the decisive reasons to opt for a merger, whereas aversion towards a full merger and lack of support base within the own organisation convinced healthcare executives to choose for a collaboration. When comparing specific healthcare sectors, the overlap in pursued motives and sub‐motives indicates that inter‐organisational collaborations and mergers are used for comparable objectives. Only a small minority of the responding executives switched between both types of integration. Institutional barriers, such as laws, regulations and financing regimes, appear to be the most restricting for healthcare executives to engage in inter‐organisational collaborations. Conclusions Our integral approach and systematic comparison across sectors could serve policymakers, regulators and healthcare providers in aligning organisational objectives and societal objectives in decision‐making on collaborations and mergers. Future research is recommended to study multiple collaboration and merger cases qualitatively for a detailed examination of decision‐making by healthcare executives, and develop an integral assessment framework for balancing collaborations and mergers based on their effects in the medium to long term.

public, environmental & occupational health,health policy & services
Does hospital cooperation increase the quality of healthcare?

Paolo Berta,Veronica Vinciotti,Francesco Moscone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1911.04168

2019-11-11

Applications

Abstract:Motivated by reasons such as altruism, managers from different hospitals may engage in cooperative behaviours, which shape the networked healthcare economy. In this paper we study the determinants of hospital cooperation and its association with the quality delivered by hospitals, using Italian administrative data. We explore the impact on patient transfers between hospitals (cooperation/network) of a set of demand-supply factors, as well as distance-based centrality measures. We then use this framework to assess how such cooperation is related to the overall quality for the hospital of origin and of destination of the patient transfer. The over-dispersed Poisson mixed model that we propose, inspired by the literature on social relations models, is suitably defined to handle network data, which are rarely used in health economics. The results show that distance plays an important role in hospital cooperation, though there are other factors that matter such as geographical centrality. Another empirical finding is the existence of a positive relationship between hospital cooperation and the overall quality of the connected hospitals. The absence of a source of information on the quality of hospitals accessible to all providers, such as in the form of star ratings, may prevent some hospitals to engage and cooperate with other hospitals of potentially higher quality. This may result in a lower degree of cooperation among hospitals and a reduction in quality overall.
Medical group governance for better organisational integration

Kara Witalis,Tamara Brown

DOI: https://doi.org/10.69554/okvn5072

2024-06-01

Abstract:Today, three of four US physicians are employed by hospitals, health systems or corporations. Forward-thinking healthcare leaders are looking for ways to leverage the intellectual capital of their employed and affiliated physicians and tighten physician–hospital integration as a means to improve care management and coordination, improve access and quality and reduce costs. Structured medical group governance is one such approach taken by healthcare leaders to enable meaningful and intentional physician–hospital joint decision making and better integration. Governance enables providers to unify and speak with one collective voice, influence the business side of clinical matters, build a unified brand and culture within the organisation and set policy or standards needed to be adopted at scale, to name just a few. Since 2019, Providence Health, a national not-for-profit Catholic Health System providing services across seven states with nearly 9,000 employed or affiliated physicians, has developed a multi-tiered medical group governance structure to coalesce on strategic direction and the major decisions that influence the clinical practice. This paper describes Providence Health’s journey in designing and maturing its medical group governance structure. In this case study, the authors describe the why, the what and the how of medical group governance and provide lessons learned and specific examples of the impact Providence Medical Group boards have had on clinician integration, engagement and alignment across the system.
Hospital affiliations, co-branding, and consumer impact

William R Gombeski Jr,Joe O Claypool,Michael Karpf,Jason Britt,Mark Birdwhistell,Karen Riggs,Tanya Wray,Jan Taylor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07359683.2014.874873

Abstract:Alliances, affiliations, and partnerships continue to grow as one way for health care organizations to better serve their customers and compete with other organizations and networks. These organizational relationships are often promoted through co-branding joint programs and services. A study of consumers was conducted and shows that these organizational relationships positively affect consumer future behavior and benefit the organizations involved. Most importantly, the benefits of these organizational relationships grow as familiarity and understanding of the "new" partner in the market increases.
Unravelling collaborative governance dynamics within healthcare networks: a scoping review

Zakaria Belrhiti,Maryam Bigdeli,Aniss Lakhal,Dib Kaoutar,Saad Zbiri,Sanaa Belabbes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czae005

2024-01-31

Health Policy and Planning

Abstract:Abstract In many countries, healthcare systems suffer from fragmentation between hospitals and primary care. In response, many governments institutionalized healthcare networks (HN) to facilitate integration and efficient healthcare delivery. Despite potential benefits, the implementation of HN is often challenged by inefficient collaborative dynamics that result in delayed decision-making, lack of strategic alignment and lack of reciprocal trust between network members. Yet, limited attention has been paid to the collective dynamics, challenges and enablers for effective inter-organizational collaborations. To consider these issues, we carried out a scoping review to identify the underlying processes for effective inter-organizational collaboration and the contextual conditions within which these processes are triggered. Following appropriate methodological guidance for scoping reviews, we searched four databases [PubMed (n = 114), Web of Science (n = 171), Google Scholar (n = 153) and Scopus (n = 52)] and used snowballing (n = 22). A total of 37 papers addressing HN including hospitals were included. We used a framework synthesis informed by the collaborative governance framework to guide data extraction and analysis, while being sensitive to emergent themes. Our review showed the prominence of balancing between top-down and bottom-up decision-making (e.g. strategic vs steering committees), formal procedural arrangements and strategic governing bodies in stimulating participative decision-making, collaboration and sense of ownership. In a highly institutionalized context, the inter-organizational partnership is facilitated by pre-existing legal frameworks. HN are suitable for tackling wicked healthcare issues by mutualizing resources, staff pooling and improved coordination. Overall performance depends on the capacity of partners for joint action, principled engagement and a closeness culture, trust relationships, shared commitment, distributed leadership, power sharing and interoperability of information systems To promote the effectiveness of HN, more bottom-up participative decision-making, formalization of governance arrangement and building trust relationships are needed. Yet, there is still inconsistent evidence on the effectiveness of HN in improving health outcomes and quality of care.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Governance of global health research consortia: Sharing sovereignty and resources within Future Health Systems

Bridget Pratt,Adnan A Hyder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.039

Abstract:Global health research partnerships are increasingly taking the form of consortia that conduct programs of research in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). An ethical framework has been developed that describes how the governance of consortia comprised of institutions from high-income countries and LMICs should be structured to promote health equity. It encompasses initial guidance for sharing sovereignty in consortia decision-making and sharing consortia resources. This paper describes a first effort to examine whether and how consortia can uphold that guidance. Case study research was undertaken with the Future Health Systems consortium, performs research to improve health service delivery for the poor in Bangladesh, China, India, and Uganda. Data were thematically analysed and revealed that proposed ethical requirements for sharing sovereignty and sharing resources are largely upheld by Future Health Systems. Facilitating factors included having a decentralised governance model, LMIC partners with good research capacity, and firm budgets. Higher labour costs in the US and UK and the funder's policy of allocating funds to consortia on a reimbursement basis prevented full alignment with guidance on sharing resources. The lessons described in this paper can assist other consortia to more systematically link their governance policy and practice to the promotion of health equity.
Do project management and network governance contribute to inter-organisational collaboration in primary care? A mixed methods study

Sanneke Schepman,Pim Valentijn,Marc Bruijnzeels,Marlies Maaijen,Dinny de Bakker,Ronald Batenburg,Antoinette de Bont

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3169-8

2018-06-07

Abstract:Background: The need for organisational development in primary care has increased as it is accepted as a means of curbing rising costs and responding to demographic transitions. It is only within such inter-organisational networks that small-scale practices can offer treatment to complex patients and continuity of care. The aim of this paper is to explore, through the experience of professionals and patients, whether, and how, project management and network governance can improve the outcomes of projects which promote inter-organisational collaboration in primary care. Methods: This paper describes a study of projects aimed at improving inter-organisational collaboration in Dutch primary care. The projects' success in project management and network governance was monitored by interviewing project leaders and board members on the one hand, and improvement in the collaboration by surveying professionals and patients on the other. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were applied to assess the projects. These were analysed, finally, using multi-level models in order to account for the variation in the projects, professionals and patients. Results: Successful network governance was associated positively with the professionals' satisfaction with the collaboration; but not with improvements in the quality of care as experienced by patients. Neither patients nor professionals perceived successful project management as associated with the outcomes of the collaboration projects. Conclusions: This study shows that network governance in particular makes a difference to the outcomes of inter-organisational collaboration in primary care. However, project management is not a predictor for successful inter-organisational collaboration in primary care.
Building organizational and strategic interprofessional collaboration and partnerships: a case study

Jody S. Frost,Sue Bookey-Bassett,Zaid Al-Hamdan,Niri Naidoo,Andrea L. Pfeifle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2024.2373280

2024-07-19

Journal of Interprofessional Care

Abstract:Developing organizational strategic partnerships is important to advance initiatives such as research, training/education, and interprofessional collaboration (IPC) with a global perspective. Commitments to collaborative leadership, intentional partnership, coordination, and progress, thematically represent the series of critical decisions and actions collectively required to achieve strategic alliance success. The purpose of this paper is to describe the evidenced-informed framework and systematic processes involved in building successful strategic organizational and collaborative partnerships for InterprofessionalResearch.Global to expand and enhance opportunities for IPC on mutually beneficial initiatives. The conceptual model for effective collaborative partnerships by Butt et al. (2008) provided a framework for InterprofessionalResearch.Global to develop two strategic organizational partnerships consistent with its mission, vision, and goals to explore interprofessional research and policy gaps through global research partnerships, grow and sustain communities of practice, and mobilize evidence-informed interprofessional education and collaborative practice across multiple and diverse contexts. These organizational partnerships are defined by a Memorandum of Understanding with clear expectations and mechanisms of communication, defined priority areas and timelines for collaborative efforts, mutual understanding of the purposes of each relationship, and timeline and expectations for periodic evaluation.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
The effects of corporate restructuring on hospital policymaking

J A Alexander,L L Morlock,B D Gifford

Abstract:Hospital corporate restructuring is the segmentation of assets or functions of the hospital into separate corporations. While these functions are almost always legally separated from the hospital, their impact on hospital policymaking may be far more direct. This study examines the effects of corporate restructuring by community hospitals on the structure, composition, and activity of hospital governing boards. In general, we expect that the policymaking function of the hospital will change to adapt to the multicorporate structure implemented under corporate restructuring, as well as the overlapping boards and diversified business responsibilities of the new corporate entity. Specifically, we hypothesize that the hospital board under corporate restructuring will conform more to the "corporate" model found in the business/industrial sector and less to the "philanthropic" model common to most community hospitals to date. Analysis of survey data from 1,037 hospitals undergoing corporate restructuring from 1979-1985 and a comparison group of 1,883 noncorporately restructured hospitals suggests general support for this hypothesis. Implications for health care governance and research are discussed.
Nurses' Participation in Clinical and Administrative Decisions in Different Types of Hospital Units

Cynthia Thornton Bacon,Smriti Shrestha,Marjorie Jenkins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000731

Abstract:Objective: This study explored the types of decisions and differences in decision making that nurses made in different types of hospital units. Background: The relationship between nurses' participation in decision making and the different types of hospital units where they work is not well understood. Methods: Nurses' participation in decision making was explored using the Participation in Decision Activities Questionnaire. The final sample included 307 nurses in 24 nursing units in 6 hospitals. Results: Nurses overall participated more in clinical than administrative decisions, and there were significant differences based on unit type. Critical care nurses had the highest and general care units the lowest levels of participation in decision making. Conclusions: Nurses in critical care units participated in higher amounts and at higher levels of clinical decisions overall than either intermediate or general care units. Nurse leaders should determine barriers to decision making in general care units and explore mechanisms to increase participation by clinical nurses.
Strategic behaviour and decision making in competitive hospital markets: an experimental investigation

Johann Han,Nadja Kairies-Schwarz,Markus Vomhof

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10754-024-09366-3

IF: 1.837

2024-03-16

International Journal of Health Economics and Management

Abstract:We investigate quality provision and the occurrence of strategic behaviour in competitive hospital markets where providers are assumed to be semi-altruistic towards patients. For this, we employ a laboratory experiment with a hospital market framing. Subjects decide on the quality levels for one of three competing hospitals respectively. We vary the organizational aspect of whether quality decisions within hospitals are made by individuals or teams. Realized monetary patient benefits go to real patients outside the lab. In both settings, we find that degrees of cooperation quickly converge towards negative values, implying absence of collusion and patient centred or competitive quality choices. Moreover, hospitals treat quality as a strategic complement and adjust their quality choice in the same direction as their competitors. The response magnitude for team markets is weaker; this is driven by non-cooperative or altruistic teams, which tend to set levels of quality that are strategically independent.

economics,business, finance,health policy & services
External drivers of inter-organizational collaboration in megaproject: a perspective based on project governance

Kai Liu,Yuming Liu,Yuanyuan Kou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-07-2023-0688

2024-01-26

Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

Abstract:Purpose Inter-organizational collaboration is the organizational guarantee and key link to achieve the goals of megaproject management. Project governance has always played an important role in the construction of megaprojects, but the relationship between project governance and organizational collaboration is unclear. The purpose of this study is to explore the role paths of different project governance mechanisms in influencing the collaborative behaviors of stakeholders and collaborative performance and to elucidate the mechanism of project governance on inter-organizational collaboration. Design/methodology/approach A conceptual framework was developed based on a comprehensive literature review, termed the structural equation model (SEM). The hypotheses of the model were tested based on data obtained from a questionnaire survey of 235 experts with experience in megaprojects within the construction industry in China. Findings The results show that project governance positively contributes to the collaborative behavior of megaproject stakeholders and the collaborative performance of the project team. Collaborative behavior acts as a partial mediator between project governance and the collaborative performance of the megaproject inter-organization alliance. The complexity of the project modulates the relationship between the governance mechanism of the project and the collaborative behavior of the stakeholders, which affects the collaborative performance of the megaproject inter-organization alliance. Originality/value The findings provide theoretical and practical implications for promoting positive collaborative behavior among stakeholders in megaproject selection and improving the collaborative performance of megaproject inter-organization alliances.

engineering, civil, industrial,management
Organizational and Individual Innovation Decisions in an Interorganizational System: Social Influence and Decision-Making Authority

Jiawei Sophia Fu,Michelle Shumate,Noshir Contractor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa018

IF: 5.75

2020-04-09

Journal of Communication

Abstract:Abstract This study examines the processes of complex innovation adoption in an interorganizational system. It distinguishes the innovation adoption mechanisms of organizational-decision-makers (ODMs), who make authority adoption decisions on behalf of an organization, from individual-decision-makers (IDMs), who make optional innovation decisions in their own work practice. Drawing on the Theory of Reasoned Action and Social Information Processing Theory, we propose and test a theoretical model of interorganizational social influence. We surveyed government health-care workers, whose advice networks mostly span organizational boundaries, across 1,849 state health agencies in Bihar, India. The collective attitudes of coworkers and advice network members influence health-care workers’ attitudes and perceptions of social norms toward four types of innovations. However, individuals’ decision-making authority moderates these relationships; advisors’ attitudes have a greater influence on ODMs, while perceptions of social norms only influence IDMs. Notably, heterogeneity of advisors’ and coworkers’ attitudes negatively influence IDMs’ evaluations of innovations but not ODMs’.

communication
Interprofessional collaboration in fluid teams: an ethnographic study in a Dutch healthcare context

F. van Heteren N. Raaphorst S.M. Groeneveld M. Bussemaker a Health Campus The Hague,Leiden University Medical Centre,The Hague,The Netherlandsb Institute of Public Administration,Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs,Leiden University,The Hague,The NetherlandsFia van Heteren is a PhD candidate in Medical Anthropology at both the Leiden University Medical Centre and the Institute of Public Administration,Leiden University,the Netherlands. Her research focuses on health conceptions,professional identity,roles and values,and interprofessional collaboration.Nadine Raaphorst is an assistant professor at the Institute of Public Administration,Leiden University,The Netherlands. Her research is focused on professionals' decision-making where it affects citizens most: at the ground level of government where services are provided to citizens. She focuses particularly on research questions related to fairness of decision-making,such as discrimination and equal treatment.Sandra Groeneveld is Professor in Public Management at the Institute of Public Administration,Leiden University,the Netherlands. She specializes in leadership,organizational change,teamwork,and diversity,equity,and inclusion in public organizations.Jet Bussemaker is Professor in Policy,Science and Societal Impact at both the Leiden University Medical Center and the Institute of Public Administration,Leiden University,the Netherlands. She specializes in public governance,policy learning and social inequality. Apart from her academic position she is also Chair of the National Council of Public Health & Society.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2024.2433190

2024-12-06

Journal of Interprofessional Care

Abstract:In caring for clients with combined problems, various professionals are encouraged to work together in new ways. Collaboration is often fluid, and professionals are expected to seek other professionals and organizations to solve complex problems. This type of collaboration is not institutionalized; it may therefore be hard to develop routines compared to fixed teams. Knowledge about how frontline professionals work together in non-institutionalized forms of fluid collaboration is lacking. This article addresses this gap by studying how professionals from various disciplines work together in fluid collaborative contexts when caring for clients with combined problems. To this end, this empirical research has an iterative design and uses ethnographic fieldwork in studying these hard-to-grasp contexts. In the analysis, we explore whether and how interprofessional collaboration manifests in fluid teams in general practice, mental healthcare and social welfare a Dutch city and how team fluidity plays a role.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
When trust, confidence, and faith collide: refining a realist theory of how and why inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work

Justin Avery Aunger,Ross Millar,Joanne Greenhalgh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06630-x

2021-06-26

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:Abstract Background Health systems are facing unprecedented socioeconomic pressures as well as the need to cope with the ongoing strain brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, the reconfiguration of health systems to encourage greater collaboration and integration has been promoted with a variety of collaborative shapes and forms being encouraged and developed. Despite this continued interest, evidence for success of these various arrangements is lacking, with the links between collaboration and improved performance often remaining uncertain. To date, many examinations of collaborations have been undertaken, but use of realist methodology may shed additional light on how and why collaboration works, and whom it benefits. Methods This paper seeks to test initial context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) of interorganisational collaboration with the view to producing a refined realist theory. This phase of the realist synthesis used case study and evaluation literature; combined with supplementary systematic searches. These searches were screened for rigour and relevance, after which CMOCs were extracted from included literature and compared against existing ones for refinement, refutation, or affirmation. We also identified demi-regularities to better explain how these CMOCs were interlinked. Results Fifty-one papers were included, from which 338 CMOCs were identified, where many were analogous. This resulted in new mechanisms such as ‘risk threshold’ and refinement of many others, including trust, confidence, and faith, into more well-defined constructs. Refinement and addition of CMOCs enabled the creation of a ‘web of causality’ depicting how contextual factors form CMOC chains which generate outputs of collaborative behaviour. Core characteristics of collaborations, such as whether they were mandated or cross-sector, were explored for their proposed impact according to the theory. Conclusion The formulation of this refined realist theory allows for greater understanding of how and why collaborations work and can serve to inform both future work in this area and the implementation of these arrangements. Future work should delve deeper into collaborative subtypes and the underlying drivers of collaborative performance. Review registration This review is part of a larger realist synthesis, registered at PROSPERO with ID CRD42019149009 .

health care sciences & services

Interorganizational cooperation and decision making autonomy in a consortium multihospital system

Hybrid Administrative Interfaces: Authority Delegation and Reversion in Strategic Alliances

Why do some inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work when others do not? A realist review

Collaboration among public organizations: a systematic literature review on determinants of interinstitutional performance

Working together? Organizational and market determinants of collaboration between public health and medical care providers

A life-cycle model of organizational federations: the case of hospitals

Reasons for merging and collaborating in healthcare: Marriage or living apart together?

Does hospital cooperation increase the quality of healthcare?

Medical group governance for better organisational integration

Hospital affiliations, co-branding, and consumer impact

Unravelling collaborative governance dynamics within healthcare networks: a scoping review

Governance of global health research consortia: Sharing sovereignty and resources within Future Health Systems

Do project management and network governance contribute to inter-organisational collaboration in primary care? A mixed methods study

Building organizational and strategic interprofessional collaboration and partnerships: a case study

The effects of corporate restructuring on hospital policymaking

Nurses' Participation in Clinical and Administrative Decisions in Different Types of Hospital Units

Strategic behaviour and decision making in competitive hospital markets: an experimental investigation

External drivers of inter-organizational collaboration in megaproject: a perspective based on project governance

Organizational and Individual Innovation Decisions in an Interorganizational System: Social Influence and Decision-Making Authority

Interprofessional collaboration in fluid teams: an ethnographic study in a Dutch healthcare context

When trust, confidence, and faith collide: refining a realist theory of how and why inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work