Jeffrey Braithwaite, Mary T. Westbrook and Nadine A. Mallock
The purpose of this paper is to investigate in an Anglo and a Confucian‐Asian nation how pressure is exerted on middle managers by their subordinate staff, and the managerial…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate in an Anglo and a Confucian‐Asian nation how pressure is exerted on middle managers by their subordinate staff, and the managerial activities affected.
Design/methodology/approach
In a survey, Australian (n=251) and Singaporean (n=340) health managers rated the degree of pressure exerted on them by subordinate staff to devote additional time to various managerial activities. They described the influence strategies employed.
Findings
Ratings of the average pressure experienced regarding nine managerial activities were identical in both cultures. Australian managers reported significantly greater pressure affecting people and general organisational management. Singaporeans experienced more pressure affecting their quality and data management tasks. Australian subordinates used more direct‐assertive and direct‐persuasive influence strategies. Singaporeans employed more indirect‐assertive tactics, particularly poor work performance.
Research limitations/implications
The generalisability of the findings may be limited by having convenience samples from one occupational sector.
Practical implications
The cultural differences found are relevant to the increasing numbers of multinational organisations and expatriate and migrant workers. The information will inform discussions on factors affecting the assignment of managers' priorities, which can be at variance with their aspirations.
Originality/value
Managers' experiences of pressure from subordinates and how pressure is conveyed have been under‐researched, particularly cross‐culturally.
Details
Keywords
Jeffrey Braithwaite, Mary T. Westbrook, Joanne F. Travaglia, Rick Iedema, Nadine A. Mallock, Debbi Long, Peter Nugus, Rowena Forsyth, Christine Jorm and Marjorie Pawsey
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of a health system‐wide safety improvement program (SIP) three to four years after initial implementation.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of a health system‐wide safety improvement program (SIP) three to four years after initial implementation.
Design/methodology/approach
The study employs multi‐methods studies involving questionnaire surveys, focus groups, in‐depth interviews, observational work, ethnographic studies, documentary analysis and literature reviews with regard to the state of New South Wales, Australia, where 90,000 health professionals, under the auspices of the Health Department, provide healthcare to a seven‐million population. After enrolling many participants from various groups, the measurements included: numbers of staff trained and training quality; support for SIP; clinicians' reports of safety skills acquired, work practices changed and barriers to progress; RCAs undertaken; observation of functioning of teams; committees initiated and staff appointed to deal with adverse events; documentation and computer records of reports; and peak‐level responses to adverse events.
Findings
A cohort of 4 per cent of the state's health professionals has been trained and now applies safety skills and conducts RCAs. These and other senior professionals strongly support SIP, though many think further culture change is required if its benefits are to be more fully achieved and sustained. Improved information‐handling systems have been adopted. Systems for reporting adverse incidents and conducting RCAs have been instituted, which are co‐ordinated by NSW Health. When the appropriate structures, educational activities and systems are made available in the form of an SIP, measurable systems change might be introduced, as suggested by observations of the attitudes and behaviours of health practitioners and the increased reporting of, and action about, adverse events.
Originality/value
Few studies into health systems change employ wide‐ranging research methods and metrics. This study helps to fill this gap.
Details
Keywords
Jeffrey Braithwaite, Mary T. Westbrook and Nadine A. Mallock
The purpose of this paper is to investigate how, and the degree to which, superior and peer managers exerted pressure on middle managers' work cross‐culturally.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate how, and the degree to which, superior and peer managers exerted pressure on middle managers' work cross‐culturally.
Design/methodology/approach
Australian (n=251) and Singaporean (n=340) health managers, respectively of Anglo and Confucian‐Asian cultures, rated the pressures exerted on them by managers, superior and peer (managers at the same level), regarding nine work pursuits, and described the nature of this pressure.
Findings
Singaporeans reported greater pressure from superiors regarding people, customer, process and quality management. Australians and Singaporeans experienced similar pressure from superiors concerning financial, organisational, data, planning and external relations management. Singaporeans reported more pressure from peers in all work domains. In Singapore superior and peer managers applied pressure to similar activities but areas targeted by Australian peer and superior managers were not significantly related. Singaporean superiors were more likely to apply pressure through deadlines and appraisals.
Research limitations/implications
Convenience samples from one occupational sector may limit the generalisability of the results.
Practical implications
Knowledge of the degree and sources of stress encountered by middle managers in an Anglo and a Confucian‐Asian culture may enhance organisational communication both within and between these cultures.
Originality/value
Although it is a crucial issue, pressures exerted on managers by superior and particularly peer managers regarding specific managerial work pursuits has received little attention, particularly from a cross‐cultural perspective.