A case study into operational team‐working within a UK hospital

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to report on research into human resource management within an operations management environment; specifically, operational team-work amongst health care workers in a hospital. Design/methodology/approach -Eight operational teams within a UK National Health Service hospital took part and the research used a combination of survey and group discussions. Findings -The results show the construct of the team had little operational definition. Key factors identified as contributing to effective team-working include: leadership; frequency of team meetings; a climate of trust and openness. There was limited evidence of truly multi-disciplinary teams and of organisational support for team-working.Research limitations/implications -The methodology applied was appropriate, generating data to facilitate discussion and draw specific conclusions therefrom. A perceived limitation is the single case approach; however, Remenyi et al. argue this can be enough to add to the body of knowledge. In terms of implications this paper demonstrates that team-working is no panacea; as part of a bundle of good operations management practices it is associated with efficiency, effectiveness, and in this case improved patient care. Practical implications -The paper suggests a new input, process, output model of effective team-working and identifies issues to be faced in adopting a strategy of developing an operational team-based organisation. Originality/value -The value of this paper is the conclusion that the importance of operational team-working is as a paradigm for assessing how effectively individuals and groups work together, rather than as a specific organisational form with an optimal size.

Authentic Leadership: An Empirical Test of Its Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Mechanisms

“…In short by presenting their authentic self, being a role model, and encouraging an open exchange of information among group members that includes soliciting contradictory views authentic leaders are expected to facilitate (1) clarity and commitment to team objectives, (2) focus on quality or performance, (3) decision-making and communication, as well as (4) support for innovation. These four components have been posited (Borrill and West 2000) and empirically supported (e.g., Bamford and Griffin 2008) to constitute the pillars of team effectiveness.…”

“…Individuals rated their perception of their team's effectiveness. This approach is widely used for the assessment of team-related perceptions (e.g., Bamford and Griffin 2008). All items were rated on a scale from 1 (''strongly disagree'') to 5 (''strongly agree'') (e.g., ''In this team we are clear about what we are trying to achieve.…”

Organisational readiness and Lean Thinking implementation: Findings from three emergency department case studies in New Zealand

“…22 These attributes are more important since the 'hero clinician' is less relevant as patient pathways become the operational norm. 21,24 Top management and leadership, 25,18 as well as the engagement of the hospital's senior doctors, 26 provide vital support to Lean initiatives. However, clinical engagement may be restricted to those who have been 'converted to Lean' 27,p.1339 or to occupational groups whose work organising principles are similar to Lean approaches.…”

Shared Leadership Regulates Operational Team Performance in the Presence of Extreme Decisional Consensus/Conflict: Evidences from Business Process Reengineering

“…Relying on effective and efficient groups at all organization's levels is fundamental in order to achieve sustainable competitive advantage. In fact, not just top management teams, but also operational teams play a crucial role in determining processes’ efficiency, customer satisfaction, and company success (Bamford & Griffin, ).…”