2016
DOI: 10.1002/hpm.2397
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Explaining the accreditation process from the institutional isomorphism perspective: a case study of Jordanian primary healthcare centers

Abstract: Identifying these isomorphic changes may help key stakeholders to develop plans, policies, and procedures that could improve the quality of healthcare and enhance accreditation as an organizational strategic plan. Moreover, the study provided explanations of why and how organizations move to adopt new interventions and grow over time. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…On the basis of the definitions provided in Section 1, and the themes identified in Section 3, the pressures and influences on merger decision‐making for the studied organisations could be interpreted as follows: Regulative pressures: the explicit and external pressures created by changing funding models, growing accountability and compliance requirements and their associated increasing costs, a relatively new devolved model of governance, and the policy environment. Health care organisations, due to their dependency on government funding, have been shown to be particularly vulnerable to coercive pressures; Normative pressures: As norms “specify how things should be done, and define legitimate means to pursue valued ends,” merging CHS could be interpreted as being subjected to 2 contrasting sets of normative pressures. Firstly, changing funding models and a widening range of competitors for resources indirectly imply that, to stay viable, CHS must gain a bigger financial footprint, wider geographical coverage, and greater organisational sophistication in the form of better administrative systems and specialised expertise.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the basis of the definitions provided in Section 1, and the themes identified in Section 3, the pressures and influences on merger decision‐making for the studied organisations could be interpreted as follows: Regulative pressures: the explicit and external pressures created by changing funding models, growing accountability and compliance requirements and their associated increasing costs, a relatively new devolved model of governance, and the policy environment. Health care organisations, due to their dependency on government funding, have been shown to be particularly vulnerable to coercive pressures; Normative pressures: As norms “specify how things should be done, and define legitimate means to pursue valued ends,” merging CHS could be interpreted as being subjected to 2 contrasting sets of normative pressures. Firstly, changing funding models and a widening range of competitors for resources indirectly imply that, to stay viable, CHS must gain a bigger financial footprint, wider geographical coverage, and greater organisational sophistication in the form of better administrative systems and specialised expertise.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Achieving accreditation is also a possible incentive for primary healthcare services to improve their quality [ 32 ], but there are no items on the governmental agenda in that sense so far.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model of isomorphism is divided into competitive and institutional isomorphism [ 24 ]. There is a competitive aspect to accreditation and affiliation, one supported by a systematic review of the healthcare literature [ 25 ]. In many cases, academic program leadership seek accreditation to maintain a competitive position [ 26 ].…”
Section: Theoretical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%