Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management

Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management The word count distribution must include at least 400 words in response to each question. 1600 words total. Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management Library research is required in the COMPLETE assignment of each unit. At least two of your citations must be from scholarly journal articles with references and must use citations from the downloaded book, Burns, L. R., Bradley, E. H., & Weiner, B. J. (2011). Shortell and Kaluzny’s Health Care Management: Organizational Design and Behavior (6th ed.). Wikipedia, Wiki Answers, About.com, Ask.com, Yahoo Answers, eHow, Personal blogs, and other sources of that ilk are not credible for academic work. Quoting such sources as credible is strictly forbidden. Finding Articles in EBSCO (Library Help) Here are 2 links that should help you in finding articles in the library: Ebsco-finding articles Ebsco-in a minute Read the Case Study on page 113-115 called Staff Motivation at Sharp HealthCare. Answer the following questions. Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management 1. In a narrative format, discuss the key facts and critical issues presented in the case. 2. What are the key factors in Sharp’s successful approach to motivation? Do you see any weaknesses in the Sharp approach? 3. Can the Sharp approach be replicated in other health care organizations? What are some important barriers and facilitators to using the Sharp approach? 4. Would you make any recommendations to Sharp’s Pillars of Excellence? Why or why not? hm_4551_unit_1_read.pdf S A U N D E R S S R . , G A R R Y 2 0 9 0 T S S A U N D E R S Shortell and Kaluzny’s Health Care Management S R . , Organization Design and Behavior SixthG Edition A R R Y 2 0 9 0 T S Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. Shortell and Kaluzny’s Health Care Management S A U N D E R S Organization Design and Behavior Sixth Edition S R . , LawtonGRobert Burns A R R H. Bradley Elizabeth Yale Y University University of Pennsylvania Bryan Jeffrey Weiner 2 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 0 9 0 T S Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. Chapter 1 The Management Challenge of Delivering Value in Health Care: Global and U.S. Perspectives S A U Lawton Robert Burns, Elizabeth H. Bradley, and Bryan J. Weiner N D E R CHAPTER OUTLINE S • The Challenge: Deliver Value • Challenge of Rising Health Care Costs: Supply- and Demand-Side Drivers • Other Challenges Exacerbating the ValueS Challenge • Complexity of the U.S. Health Care System R • Why Changing the Health Care System Is So Difficult • Systemic Views of U.S. Health Care • Organization and Management Theory • Summative Views of Organization Theory • G to This Text Organization Theory and Behavior: A Guide . , A LEARNING OBJECTIVES R After completing this chapter, the reader should be able to: R 1. Understand the challenge of delivering value in health care Y 2. Identify the major forces affecting the delivery of health services 3. Distinguish the similarities and differences in the forces shaping health services globally 4. Understand why it is difficult to change the health care industry 5. 6. 7. 8. 2 0 Develop a system view of health care delivery 9 in a health care system Understand the different types of firms operating 0 Identify, understand, and apply the major perspectives and theories on organizations to real problems facing health care organizations T Develop mental agility in analyzing problems from multiple theoretical lenses S Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. CHAPTER 1 • The Management Challenge of Delivering Value in Health Care: Global and U.S. Perspectives KEY TERMS Ambidexterity Iron Triangle Bending the Cost Curve Macro Perspective Bounded Rationality Micro Perspective Bureaucracy Open Systems Theory Classical School of Administration Complex Adaptive System Contingency Theory Decision-Making School Evidence-Based Medicine External Environment Health Systems Hospital-Physician Relationships Human Relations School Institutional Theory Population Ecology S A U N D E R S Resource Dependence Theory Scientific Management School Social Network Approach Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management Strategic Management Perspective System Perspectives Triple Aim Value Value Chain S R The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) was launched at the World Economic Forum on January 31, . 2000. GAVI was a partnership of developing countries, organizations involved in international development and finance, the pharmaceutical industry, and philanthropic organizations. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provided seed funding , IN PRACTICE: The GAVI Alliance of $750 million for GAVI, followed by funding from several countries. GAVI was established to improve the distribution of new and underused vaccines to low-income countries and thereby reduce childhood mortality and morbidity, and increase G 2003; Milstien et al., 2008; GAVI Alliance, 2010). the health status of these populations (Martin and Marshall, A number of managerial challenges faced the GAVI Alliance in achieving its goals. First, the vision of the GAVI Alliance A had to motivate local countries to participate in this vaccination program and gradually increase their own funding for it. R Second, local countries needed to accept the responsibility to deliver the vaccine programs and the attendant results. Third, these countries had to help develop and manage localRinfrastructure to deliver the vaccines to rural populations—often referred to as the last hundred yards or miles of the supply chain. This meant the countries needed not only transportation Y and distribution networks but also a cadre of local health care workers with training in vaccine storage and administration. Fourth, the GAVI Alliance had to manage diverse stakeholders including the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, UNICEF, large pharmaceutical firms that manufactured 2 the vaccines, and the Gates Foundation. Fifth, the GAVI Alliance had to operate with a lean structure such that bureaucracy did not slow its progress. Sixth, the alliance had to develop 0 drugs at a lower cost which local countries could afford. Last, leverage over pharmaceutical firms to purchase the needed the GAVI Alliance needed a clear governance structure9 with defined responsibilities for partners. Between 2000 and 2009, GAVI directly supported the immunization of 256.7 million children for Hepatitis B, Haemophilus 0 influenzae type B (Hib), and yellow fever. GAVI also speeded up population access to underused vaccines, strengthened T health and immunization systems, and helped spawn innovative public-private partnerships (PPPs) in financing to expand vaccine coverage in 72 developing countries (GAVI Alliance, 2010). In January 2010, 10 years after the initiation of the GAVI S Alliance, The Gates Foundation committed an additional $10 billion over the next 10 years. Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 3 4 PART 1 • Introduction IN PRACTICE: The GAVI Alliance (Continued) Despite its success, GAVI has not been without its problems. Although the alliance necessarily focused heavily on developing partnerships and initiating vaccine coverage, less attention was paid to implementation of plans and mobilization of resources for ongoing treatment (in-country follow-up).Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management One reason may be that vaccine costs have risen both absolutely and as a percentage of the total health expenditures, and vaccinations may not be the top priority of developing-country governments (Milstien et al., 2008; Muraskin, 2004). Finally, the alliance partners need to grapple with the large supply chain “system costs” required to handle, transport, and store the drugs (Lydon et al., 2008) and the issue of securing long-term S financial commitments from its partners. A U managing change, forging strategic plans and leadership) are CHAPTER PURPOSE critical components of the manager’s “tool kit” in any health N A central challenge in delivering health care services in the care system. new millennium is the challenge of delivering value. D Value is created when additional features of quality or customerEservice desired by a customer can be provided at the same cost or THE CHALLENGE: R price, or when a given set of features of quality or customer DELIVER VALUE service can be delivered at a lower cost or price relativeS to other The key challenge facing health care firms is to deliver value, producers. Although investments in health care delivery can improve health status, which in turn can support economic growth and political stability (Burns, D’Aunno, and Kimberly, S 2003; Esty et al., 1999; Sachs, 2001), still the value of health R investments are not always transparent. For instance, despite evidence of the benefits of immunization coverage.(Martin and Marshall, 2003; World Health Organization, 1996) , and a steady increase globally during the 1970s and 1980s, immunization coverage declined sharply in the 1990s due to curtailed government funding in low-income countries. G The GAVI Alliance entered in 2000 and, during its first 10 years, A of a averted four million deaths and immunized a quarter billion children against deadly or disabling diseasesR(GAVI Alliance, 2010). R Why was this approach not already taken? To effect major Y GAVI changes in health care delivery and increase value, as the Alliance has, organizations require extraordinary approaches. Such approaches critically hinge on several management 2 competencies. These include assembling (global) alliances, clarifying the governance structure of the alliance, developing 0 the local health care infrastructure to deliver the needed 9 and services, balancing global and local commitments, developing local ownership of health initiatives. Managerial 0 skills (including but not limited to developing alliances, T negotiating governance and roles, conflict management, defined as the quotient of quality divided by cost. That is, firms are asked to deliver a higher level of quality at the same cost, the same level of quality at a lower cost, or higher quality at a lower cost. This challenge has been proposed to (a) providers, in the form of accountable care organizations (ACOs) and pay-for-performance, (b) suppliers, in the form of demonstrating the comparative clinical effectiveness of their products (versus alternate therapies), and (c) insurers and providers, in the form of value-based purchasing. In order to create and deliver value, health care organizations must find a way to address three health policy goals of our health care system since the late 1920s: improve the quality of care, improve access to care, and reduce cost and cost acceleration—e.g., bending the cost curve, or the reducing of health spending relative to projected trends (Commonwealth Fund, 2007a). Numerous health services researchers have questioned whether all three goals are simultaneously attainable (Chen, Jha, Guterman et al., 2010; Katz, 2010) or require a balancing act (Berwick et al., 2008). Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management The achievement of these three goals is sometimes referred to as the iron triangle of health care (Kissick, 1994). Picture an equilateral triangle, with three equal angles of 60 degrees, and assume that each angle is one of these three policy goals. Any effort to address one policy angle S Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. CHAPTER 1 • The Management Challenge of Delivering Value in Health Care: Global and U.S. Perspectives widens that angle (e.g., access) at the expense of one or both of the other two angles (e.g., quality or cost). For example, the recent health insurance reform in the United States— the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—expands insurance coverage to 30 million citizens, but its savings will reportedly be more than offset by higher expenditures (and escalating costs) resulting from the expansion of coverage (CMS, 2010). Provider organizations in the health care industry S have nevertheless been periodically challenged to accomplish A the quality and cost goals at the same time. In July 2009, U to providers from 10 U.S. markets convened in Washington discuss how they deliver care to the Medicare population N that is above average in quality and below average in cost, D compared with national data contained in the Dartmouth Atlas (Institute for Healthcare Improvement, 2009). E In past decades, providers have been asked to demonstrate a R of similar value (quality/cost) proposition using a series management techniques, such as total quality management S (e.g., reducing process variation and simultaneously raising the level of process performance), supply chain management (e.g., standardizing products to achieve consistency inSuse and lower unit cost), and clinical integration (standardizing R care paths and protocols to reduce clinical practice variations . and improve quality of care). In this past decade, the Institute of Medicine (2001) articulated six “aims for improvement” in , a high-performing health care system: care should be safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficient, and equitable. The balancing of broad health policy goals is apparent G on a global scale as well. The World Health Organization (WHO, A 2000) uses three criteria to rank national health systems: health status (similar to quality), responsiveness toRthe expectations of the population (similar to access), and social R and financial risk protection (similar to cost). Y CHALLENGE OF RISING HEALTH CARE COSTS: 2 SUPPLY- AND DEMAND- 0 SIDE DRIVERS 9 One reason why the health system is challenged to deliver 0 value is that the denominator—health costs—has been T rising steadily over time and proven difficult to restrain. Health costs in the United States have been rising at roughly 3–4 percent annually (net of inflation) for the past six decades (Altman, 2010). Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management Some have argued that public and private sector efforts work to temporarily rein in this rate of increase, only to see the cost escalation return (Altman and Levitt, 2002). Why do costs rise inexorably? Many experts argue that the underlying driver of rising costs is technology and its broad application to new patients and patient indications (Aaron and Ginsburg, 2009; Commonwealth Fund, 2007b; Congressional Budget Office, 2008). Following Weisbrod (1991), technological improvements spur higher prices, higher demand, and higher costs—all of which call for greater insurance coverage for the new technology, which then drives further technological innovation. Technology contributes to rising costs in other ways. In contrast to other industries, health care technology is often a complement rather than a substitute for labor—e.g., requiring many technicians to utilize the new equipment. Moreover, providers often compete for patients based on the sophistication of the services and equipment they offer, leading to expensive excess capacity and duplication in a local market (“technology wars”). Insurance is another driver of rising costs, as broader coverage (e.g., for more people, or more benefits) increases demand and thus health spending, as well as the attendant problem of moral hazard (Arrow, 1963) whereby the insured utilize more health care than they would if they paid for services out of pocket (i.e., from their own resources without insurance). There are several supply- and demand-side drivers of rising health costs. On the supply side, costs are driven by imperfect information markets whereby purchasers and consumers of health care are not able to discern quality differences perfectly among health care providers, make few repeat purchases, and enjoy less transparency of pricing, which allows great variation in the economic rents earned by providers of the same product or service. Such rents also result from provider market power. Costs are also driven in part by providers’ practice of defensive medicine, providers’ focus on acute rather than chronic care or prevention, and poor coordination of services among providers. Finally, costs are driven by geographic variations in the supply of hospital beds and specialist physicians, which may induce demand (Roemer, 1961). S Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 5 6 PART 1 • Introduction GEOGRAPHIC VARIATION IN HEALTH CARE SPENDING: A CLOSER LOOK Health care expenditures in the United States have been rising for years, but per capita spending on health care varies widely across the country. In 2004, for example, Medicare expenditures per beneficiary ranged from roughly $4,000 in Utah to $6,700 in Massachusetts. Even greater differences appear in comparisons of smaller geographic units and individual medical providers. Some estimate that Medicare spending would decrease by 29 percent if spending in mediumand high-spending areas matched spending in low-spending areas (Wennberg, Fisher, and Skinner, 2002).Assignment: Staff Motivation At Sharp Healthcare Management S Why does health care spending vary so much across the country? The reasons are complex and difficult to tease apart. A of illness play an important role, but together these factors account Differences in prices of health care services and severity for only half of the geographic variation in spending. URegional differences in the supply of specialist physicians and health care facilities are also thought to play a role. Regional differences in provider willingness to adopt new technologies or N provide costly treatments that might or might not improve health care outcomes are also thought to increase costs. Dof growth in health care expenditures (“bend the cost curve”) point to Scholars and policy makers looking to slow the rate organized delivery systems that focus on coordinated Ecare and prevention as a promising way to reduce the costs associated with the efficiencies, misaligned incentives, and poor quality attributed to the highly fragmented nature of the health care Refforts to promote health reform, for example, President Barack Obama system that currently exists in the United States. In his praised the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and the Cleveland S Clinic in Ohio as examples of hospitals providing the highest-quality care at costs well below the national norm, and suggested that all providers in the country practice their type of medicine. S R . DEBATE TIME: Defensive Medicine , Do physicians order unnecessary tests out of fear of being sued by patients? If so, how much does “defensive medicine” contribute to the escalating costs of medical care in the United States? These issues are hotly debated. On the one hand, physicians practicing in high-liability specialties likeG obstetrics report that they routinely order more tests than are medically necessary in order to reduce the risk that they will end up in court (Studdert et al, 2005). In a recent Wall Street Journal A to diagnose and not ordering tests… It’s someth … Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10

RECOMMENDED: [ SOLVED]Week 4 Discussion Board Post Chapter 5-Motivation: Understanding Self and Others