Search results

Continuous quality improvement focuses on the customer and, therefore, requires attention to customers’ feedback as a vital input. Customers’ feedback in general hospitals includes utilization statistics of various services, patient satisfaction surveys and patients’ complaints. The role of complaint data as a management tool, and particularly as applied to quality improvement, has received little attention in the literature. As a quality control tool, complaints are investigated on the individual, unit and organizational levels. Repeated complaints about the same units, procedures or individuals, are especially important for quality review. The role of the hospital administration is to draw on the human, technological and procedural resources at its disposal, along a solution time interval (immediate, short and long term), in designing its policy for quality improvement. Presents three examples of policy changes. The aggregate of complaint data serves, in addition, for follow‐up of the effect of changes introduced by policy decisions.

Describes and contrasts the perceptions of formal and informal authority of hospital directors of two different kinds of organizations: hospitals that are part of public multi‐hospital organizations (PMOs) and independent hospitals. Indicates that all the directors perceive their informal authority to be greater than their formal authority. However, there is a gap in the perception of formal and informal authority by directors of the two types of hospital. Directors of independent hospitals perceive themselves to have more formal and informal authority than do their colleagues at hospitals that are part of PMOs. Both structural and personal explanations for these findings are given. In addition, discusses the implications for policy making of the source of authority, informal, and formal authority in the transition to autonomous semi‐independent hospitals in a changing environment.

Given the enormous size of the health care industry, the problem of developing high‐quality, cost‐effective health care delivery systems is growing in importance. There is general consensus that health care systems require a continuous process of quality improvement (QI). Less agreement, however, surrounds the mechanisms to be implemented so that such a process is effective. This study aims to bring empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that a QI program in a general hospital – a special context of the health care delivery system – does not necessarily lead to better overall organizational performance results.

The study was done at the hospital level, and included all acute care hospitals in Israel. Data was collected in 16 of the country's 23 hospitals, a 70 percent response rate. The study compared hospital performance before and after the QI program implementation.

The study shows that QI creates meaningful improvement events. In addition, the research supports the hypothesis that increasing the number of QI activities (items) included in the QI program brings about more improvement events. The results do not support the hypothesis that high, rather than low, intensive implementation of QI activities leads to more improvement events.

The special context of general hospitals decreases the effects of a QI program on overall hospital performance, whereas QI activities function as triggers in initiating improvement events.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest a new safety self‐efficacy construct and to explore its antecedents and interaction with standardization to influence in‐patient safety. Design/methodology/approach – The paper used a survey of 161 nurses using a self‐administered questionnaire over a 14‐day period in two large Israeli general hospitals. Nurses answered questions relating to four safety self‐efficacy antecedents: enactive mastery experiences; managers as safety role models; verbal persuasion; and safety priority, that relate to the perceived level of standardization and safety self‐efficacy. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the scale's construct validity. Regression models were used to test hypotheses regarding the antecedents and influence of safety self‐efficacy. Findings – Results indicate that: managers as safety role models; distributing safety information; and priority given to safety, contributed to safety self‐efficacy. Additionally, standardization moderated the effects of safety self‐efficacy and patient safety such that safety self‐efficacy was positively associated with patient safety when standardization was low rather than high. Hospital managers should be aware of individual motivations as safety self‐efficacy when evaluating the potential influence of standardization on patient safety. Originality/value – Theoretically, the study introduces a new safety self‐efficacy concept, and captures its antecedents and influence on safety performance. Also, the study suggests safety self‐efficacy as a boundary condition for the influence of standardization on safety performance. Implementing standardization in healthcare is problematic because not all processes can be standardized. In this case, self‐efficacy plays an important role in securing patient safety. Hence, safety self‐efficacy may serve as a “substitute‐for‐standardization,” by promoting staff behaviors that affect patient safety.

What is technology transfer and why is it important for strategy? Many firms focus on innovation as a central component of their strategy to achieve a competitive advantage over their rivals. To this end, companies exploit a variety of sources of innovation, both within and outside the boundaries of the firm.¹ In-house research and development leading to product or process innovations offer certain advantages relative to outsourcing, due in particular to the transaction costs associated with contracting for knowledge. At the same time, in-house innovation is costly and fraught with risk.

This article explores the role of history and historical memory in the formation of early Zionist/Israeli national security doctrine. To that end, it makes three moves. First, it explores a series of public addresses made by Zalman Rubashov (Shazar) in 1942–1943. A key public intellectual in the Jewish community of preindependent Palestine (the Yishuv), Rubashov means to help his listeners make sense of, and respond collectively to, the unfolding destruction of European Jewry. Second, it draws cautious parallels between those public intellectual pronouncements and the postwar work of Friedrich Meinecke, a prominent German historian and public intellectual and a sometime teacher of Rubashov. In both cases, I suggest, history does more than make sense of a moment of political transition: It seeks to reframe the self-understandings of citizens and their collective political relations. Third, drawing on a recent memoir by Noam Chayut, a prominent Israeli antioccupation activist, I explore how those self-understandings can be lost when the historical claims upon which they are predicated lose their sense of immediacy, naturalness, or coherence.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

Using a unique longitudinal survey of employers in the United States during the 1990s, this chapter examines the trends and factors associated with how businesses have invested in high performance workplace practices. The specific workplace practices examined include shared rewards, job rotation, workforce training, employee involvement in problem solving, and self-managed employee teams. The incidence and diffusion of innovative workplace practices such as these varies over time but not in a unidirectional way. Employers with a more external focus and broader networks to learn about best practices are more likely to have extensively invested in these types of workplace practices. The educational quality of the workforce and investments in physical capital, especially information technology, appear to be complementary with a range of workplace practices. However, the association between unionization and workplace practices is mixed. Unionized establishments are more likely to train their employees but nonunionized establishments are more likely to have engaged a higher fraction of their nonmanagerial workers in problem solving. Finally, for employers in the manufacturing sector, past profits tend to be positively associated with more extensive investments in high performance workplace practices.

This chapter introduces the important connections between media, democracy, and development in Brazil. Brazilian thought has relied heavily on conceptual oppositions in attempts to understand the country, as if there were something mysteriously contradictory in our culture and history, forever set on a rift between modernity and tradition. However convincingly described, the origin of such oppositions has never been fully explained. Introducing media history and theory into this discussion, we present a material dichotomy that illuminates the more abstract and cultural explanations of our particular history. We look at the region of Minas Geraes, where a sophisticated and diverse culture developed after the gold rush in the eighteenth century, in the Americas, and contrast such cultural achievements with the insurmountable difficulties in establishing a compatible written culture, primarily due to the prohibition of printing in the colony. We take note of the particular experience of the Conversos in Brazil, Jews who adopted Christianity in the shadow of the Portuguese Inquisition, as key to understand our ambivalent relationship to the written word and to knowledge. We describe commercial and cultural networks and contrast them with the paucity of media networks, including those of books and mail, domestic and international. This material disconnect, constitutive of colonial times in general, was particularly important during the formative years of a national market and identity and continues to resonate in the present.

Knowledge sharing in research communities has been considered indispensable to progress in science. The aim of this paper is to analyze the mechanisms restricting knowledge sharing in science. It considers three categories of academia–industry knowledge transfer and a range of individual and contextual variables as possible predictors of knowledge-sharing restrictions.

A unique empirical data sample was collected based on a survey among 212 life science researchers affiliated with universities and other non-profit research institutions. A rich descriptive analysis was followed by binominal regression analysis, including relevant checks for the robustness of the results.

Researchers in academia who actively collaborate with industry are more likely to omit relevant content from publications in co-authorship with other academic researchers; delay their co-authored publications, exclude relevant content during public presentations; and deny requests for access to their unpublished and published knowledge.

This study informs policymakers that different types of knowledge-sharing restrictions are predicted by different individual and contextual factors, which suggests that policies concerning academia–industry knowledge and technology transfer should be tailored to contextual specificities.

This study contributes new predictors of knowledge-sharing restrictions to the literature on academia–industry interactions, including outcome expectations, trust and sharing climate. This study augments the knowledge management literature by separately considering the roles of various academic knowledge-transfer activities in instigating different types of knowledge-sharing restrictions in scientific research.