A Comparative Study of 11 Local Health Department Organizational Networks

Abstract

Context Although the nation’s local health departments (LHDs) share a common mission, variability in administrative structures is a barrier to identifying common, optimal management strategies. There is a gap in understanding what unifying features LHDs share as organizations that could be leveraged systematically for achieving high performance. Objective To explore sources of commonality and variability in a range of LHDs by comparing intraorganizational networks. Intervention We used organizational network analysis to document relationships between employees, tasks, knowledge, and resources within LHDs, which may exist regardless of formal administrative structure. Setting A national sample of 11 LHDs from seven states that differed in size, geographic location, and governance. Participants Relational network data were collected via an on-line survey of all employees in 11 LHDs. A total of 1 062 out of 1 239 employees responded (84% response rate). Outcome Measures Network measurements were compared using coefficient of variation. Measurements were correlated with scores from the National Public Health Performance Assessment and with LHD demographics. Rankings of tasks, knowledge, and resources were correlated across pairs of LHDs. Results We found that 11 LHDs exhibited compound organizational structures in which centralized hierarchies were coupled with distributed networks at the point of service. Local health departments were distinguished from random networks by a pattern of high centralization and clustering. Network measurements were positively associated with performance for 3 of 10 essential services (r > 0.65). Patterns in the measurements suggest how LHDs adapt to the population served. Conclusions Shared network patterns across LHDs suggest where common organizational management strategies are feasible. This evidence supports national efforts to promote uniform standards for service delivery to diverse populations.

Nursing Needs Big Data and Big Data Needs Nursing

“…Clancy et al () have led a series of studies that apply the systems science perspective as well as computational models and simulation for purposes such as predicting the impact of the EHR on practice patterns. In terms of survey data, Merrill, Keeling, and Carley () collected data from 11 public health departments and used organizational network analysis, a computational method derived from social network analysis, to examine the linkage between network structure and performance on essential public health services. Using social media as a big data source, Yoon and colleagues applied data mining and other computational techniques to a large corpus of Tweets related to physical activity to assess content, sentiments, and network structures (Yoon & Bakken, ; Yoon, Elhadad, & Bakken, ).…”

Assessing local capacity to expand rural breast cancer screening and patient navigation: An iterative mixed-method tool

“…Understanding social network characteristics among stakeholders and potential partners often facilitated determinations of county capacity (Merrill, Keeling, & Carley, 2010; Schensul, 2009). Perceived competition and local control are significant concerns, whether in rural communities or elsewhere (Chavis, 2001).…”

The social network of international health aid

“…A recent survey of a large body of empirical research on knowledge transmission in social networks concludes that " [m]any studies across all levels have found that a central network position, defined either in terms of the number of direct contacts or both direct and indirect contacts, has a positive influence on knowledge creation, transfer, and adoption" (Phelps et al, 2012(Phelps et al, , 1138. An emerging literature on networks of health policy practitioners in domestic contexts also tends to stress the benefits that network connections can bring to performance (Blanchet & James, 2013;Blanchet et al, 2014;Browne et al, 2017;Gold et al, 2008;Jippes et al, 2010;Khosla et al, 2016;Merrill et al, 2010;Pagliccia et al, 2010;Weishaar et al, 2015).…”