Search results

The purpose of this paper is to articulate cutting-edge conceptions of the relationship between local processes in the here-and-now, and the broader influences on those processes, that are both organic and overtly designed, and to discern the implications of this relationship for future research, policy and practice.

A focused and structured approach was taken to give effect to this purpose by reviewing the chosen articles in this collection, which from the 2018 Organizational Behavior in Health Care conference papers.

Research in coordination within and across health care boundaries increasingly recognizes: the multilevel influences on human action and interaction in health care delivery; the challenge of balancing individual or local agency with overt interventions; the everchanging the local circumstances of healthcare delivery; and the need to foster reflexivity, that is, self-improvement capacity, in healthcare organizations.

Interventions to improve care coordination must be grounded in the reality of changing local circumstances and incentives for action from the broader environment.

This paper articulates the implied tension in health care delivery between individual and local agency, and imposed structures that may contradict, but are at the same time necessary, to foster such agency.

Artificial intelligence (AI) raises many expectations regarding its ability to profoundly transform health care delivery. There is an abundant literature on the technical performance of AI applications in many clinical fields (e.g. radiology, ophthalmology). This article aims to bring forward the importance of studying organizational readiness to integrate AI into health care delivery.

The reflection is based on our experience in digital health technologies, diffusion of innovations and healthcare organizations and systems. It provides insights into why and how organizational readiness should be carefully considered.

As an important step to ensure successful integration of AI and avoid unnecessary investments and costly failures, better consideration should be given to: (1) Needs and added-value assessment; (2) Workplace readiness: stakeholder acceptance and engagement; (3) Technology-organization alignment assessment and (4) Business plan: financing and investments. In summary, decision-makers and technology promoters should better address the complexity of AI and understand the systemic challenges raised by its implementation in healthcare organizations and systems.

Few studies have focused on the organizational issues raised by the integration of AI into clinical routine. The current context is marked by a perplexing gap between the willingness of decision-makers and technology promoters to capitalize on AI applications to improve health care delivery and the reality on the ground, where it is difficult to initiate the changes needed to realize their full benefits while avoiding their negative impacts.

Despite growing attention to physician engagement there is a lack of literature to guide the development of physician-led interventions. A scoping review was conducted to describe physician-led strategies that have been implemented to promote increased physician engagement in acute care settings. Strategies are viewed through the theoretical lens of institutional work to advance the understanding about how the theory can be applied. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Searches were conducted in English-language publications (2012–2017). Of 35 retained articles, 15 were from the gray literature; and 20 were peer reviewed. The review was guided by Arskey and O’Malley’s (2005) five-stage process.

Five themes reflecting different foci of physician-led activity were examined from the perspective of institutional work: systematically analyze context using participatory methods; work collaboratively toward locally defined, shared targets and build in processes to monitor progress; expand physicians’ role and capacity to include leadership toward shared organizational goals; promote appropriate rewards and incentives for work that builds engagement; and invest in opportunities for formal and informal communication and interaction.

Physicians considering action to increase their engagement in system improvement may benefit from analysis of local opportunities and barriers in selecting context-relevant activities that will motivate participation and build engagement through a balance of institutional work.

The paper considers the potential for physicians to initiate and support activity that will increase their engagement. It provides pragmatic strategies for designing intervention and research using the theoretical lens of institutional work.

Health systems are periodically confronted by crises – think of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, H1N1, and Ebola – during which they are called upon to manage exceptional situations without interrupting essential services to the population. The ability to accomplish this dual mandate is at the heart of resilience strategies, which in healthcare systems involve developing surge capacity to manage a sudden influx of patients. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper relates insights from resilience research to the four “S” of surge capacity (staff, stuff, structures and systems) and proposes a framework based on complexity theory to better understand and assess resilience factors that enable the development of surge capacity in complex health systems.

Detailed and dynamic complexities manifest in different challenges during a crisis. Resilience factors are classified according to these types of complexity and along their temporal dimensions: proactive factors that improve preparedness to confront both usual and exceptional requirements, and passive factors that enable response to unexpected demands as they arise during a crisis. The framework is completed by further categorizing resilience factors according to their stabilizing or destabilizing impact, drawing on feedback processes described in complexity theory. Favorable order resilience factors create consistency and act as stabilizing forces in systems, while favorable disorder factors such as diversity and complementarity act as destabilizing forces.

The framework suggests a balanced and innovative process to integrate these factors in a pragmatic approach built around the fours “S” of surge capacity to increase health system resilience.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the appropriation of control rooms based on value-based integrated performance management tools implemented in all publicly funded health organizations in Quebec (Canada) as a form of legitimate sociomaterial work.

Multi-site organizational ethnographic case studies in two Integrated health and social services centers, with narrative process analysis of triangulated qualitative data collected through non-participant observation (163 h), individual semi-structured interviews (N = 34), and document review (N = 143).

Three types of legitimate sociomaterial work are accomplished when actors appropriate control rooms: 1) reformulating performance management work; 2) disrupting accountability work and; 3) effecting value-based integrated performance management. Each actor (tools, institutions and people) follows recurrent institutional work-paths: tools consistently engage in disruptive work; institutions consistently engage in maintaining work, and people consistently engage in creation work. The study reveals the potential of performance management tools as “effective integrators” of the technological, managerial, policy and delivery levels of data-driven health system performance and improvement.

This paper draws on theoretically informed empirical insights to develop actionable knowledge around how to better design, implement and adapt tool-driven health system change: 1) Packaging the three agents of data-driven system change in health care: tools, institutions, people; 2) Redefining the search for performance in health care in the context of value creation, and; 3) Strengthening clinical and managerial relevance in health performance management practice.

The authors aim to stimulate new and original scholarship around the under-theorized concept of sociomaterial work, challenging theoretical, ontological and practical conceptions of work in healthcare organizations and beyond.

The purpose of this paper of inter-professional networks is to analyze the evolution of relationships between professional groups enacting new forms of collaboration to address clinical imperatives.

This paper uses a case study based on semi-structured interviews with physicians and nurses, document analysis and informal discussions.

This study documents how two inter-professional networks were developed through professional agency. The findings show that the means by which networks are developed influence the form of collaboration therein. One of the networks developed from day-to-day, immediately relevant, exchange, for patient care. The other one developed from more formal and infrequent research and training exchanges that were seen as less decisive in facilitating patient care. The latter resulted in a loosely knit network based on a small number of ad hoc referrals while the other resulted in a tightly knit network based on frequent referrals and advice seeking.

Developing inter-professional networks likely require a sustained phase of interpersonal contacts characterized by persuasion, knowledge sharing, skill demonstration and trust building from less powerful professional groups to obtain buy-in from more powerful professional groups. The nature of the collaboration in any resulting network depends largely on the nature of these initial contacts.

The literature on inter-professional healthcare networks focusses on mandated networks such as NHS managed care networks. There is a lack of research on inter-professional networks that emerged from the bottom up at the initiative of healthcare professionals in response to clinical imperatives. This study looks at some forms of collaboration that these “grass-root” initiatives engender and how they are consolidated.

In this retrospective of Ann Langley's extensive career, she shares how methodological insights emerged in her research career as a qualitative researcher in strategy and management. Her retrospective provides the back story of some of her highly-cited methods papers. Ann acknowledges the role that other researchers and authors have played in her research career.

This chapter focuses on the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on the recognition through discourses of essentiality, of low-status workers and more specifically of care aides as an occupational group that performs society’s ‘dirty work’. The pandemic appears as a privileged moment to challenge the normative hegemony of how work is valued within society. However, public recognition through political discourse is a necessary but insufficient element in producing social change. Based on the theory of performativity, this chapter empirically probes conditions and mechanisms that enable a transition from discourse of essentiality to substantive recognition of the work performed by care aides in healthcare organizations. The authors rely on three main sources of data: scientific-scholarly works, documents from government, various associations and unions, and popular media reports published between February 2020 and 1 July 2022. While discourse of essentiality at the highest level of politics is associated with rapid policy response to value the work of care aides, it is embedded in a system structure and culture that restrains the establishment of substantive policy that recognizes the nature, complexity, and societal importance of care aide work. The chapter contributes to the literature on performativity by demonstrating the importance of the institutionalization of competing logics in contemporary health and social care systems and how it limits the effectiveness of discourse in promulgating new values and norms and engineering social change.

The theme of collegiality and more broadly of changes in the governance of universities has attracted growing interest within the sociology of higher education. As institutions, contemporary universities are inhabited by competing logics often defined in terms of market pressures and are shaped by the higher education policies of governments. Collegiality is an ideal-type form of university governance based on expertise and scientific excellence. Our study looks at manifestations of collegiality in two publicly funded universities in Canada. Collegiality is explored through the structural attributes of governance arrangements and academic culture in action as a form of self-governance. Case studies rely on two data sources: (1) policy documents and secondary data on various aspects of university development, and (2) semi-structured interviews with key players in the governance of these organisations, including unions. Two main findings with implications for the enactment of collegiality as a governance mode in universities are discussed. The first is that governance structures are slowly transitioning into more hybrid and corporate forms, where academics remain influential but share and negotiate influence with a broader set of stakeholders. The second is the appearance of forces that promote a delocalisation of collegiality, where academics invest in external scientific networks to assert collegiality and self-governance and may disinvest in their own institution, thus contributing to the redefinition of academic citizenship. Status differentiation among academic colleagues is associated with the externalisation of collegiality. Mechanisms to associate collegiality with changes in universities and their environment need to be further explored.

Collegiality is the modus operandi of universities. Collegiality is central to academic freedom and scientific quality. In this way, collegiality also contributes to the good functioning of universities’ contribution to society and democracy. In this concluding paper of the special issue on collegiality, we summarize the main findings and takeaways from our collective studies. We summarize the main challenges and contestations to collegiality and to universities, but also document lines of resistance, activation, and maintenance. We depict varieties of collegiality and conclude by emphasizing that future research needs to be based on an appreciation of this variation. We argue that it is essential to incorporate such a variation-sensitive perspective into discussions on academic freedom and scientific quality and highlight themes surfaced by the different studies that remain under-explored in extant literature: institutional trust, field-level studies of collegiality, and collegiality and communication. Finally, we offer some remarks on methodological and theoretical implications of this research and conclude by summarizing our research agenda in a list of themes.