Managers and professionals: competing ideologies

Wc, Leung

doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7266.s2-7266

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The responses received in this study confirm the concern (as expressed by Leung, 2000) that doctors have started viewing clinical governance with skepticism. Some doctors feel that it was imposed without adequate consultation, and this has caused resentment among clinicians.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

“…However, do doctors share the same optimism on clinical governance? Leung (2000) points out that although some doctors view clinical governance as essential, others are becoming increasingly disillusioned and some are sceptical about the benefits of clinical governance. For Goodman (1998), clinical governance is "rhetoric" with no "intuitive meaning", and hence will receive very little response from doctors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance

Som

2005

International Journal of Public Sector Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate on the response of doctors to health policy initiatives in general and clinical governance in particular. Design/methodology/approach -A qualitative approach has been adopted where the empirical data collection and the analysis are influenced by a phenomenological case study approach. An instrumental case study is undertaken and a heterogeneous group of 33 persons with important responsibilities for clinical governance was interviewed using a semi-structured format. Findings -The results indicate that doctors are not enthusiastic about clinical governance and it is not receiving wholehearted support from doctors because they feel that clinical governance is a management-led initiative imposed without adequate consultations. The real reasons for lack of enthusiasm, indifference and sometimes resistance of doctors to clinical governance are examined. This paper points out the tension between an organisation (wishing to bring clinical care within a management framework) and doctors (who are resisting managerial efforts to replace the old framework of bureau professionalism). Research limitations/implications -Further research is required to develop a better understanding of the influence of clinical governance on power and conflict in NHS organisations. Practical implications -This paper has practical implications for policy makers as well as NHS managers. Policy makers may consider suitable amendments in clinical governance to minimise resistance and seek the support of clinicians. A better understanding of this issue would perhaps enable NHS management to develop better management practices that will make it possible to seek the support of doctors for clinical governance. Originality/value -Limited attention has been paid to understanding the response of doctors to clinical governance. This empirical research makes a valuable contribution by focusing on this important aspect of clinical governance.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance

Som

2005

International Journal of Public Sector Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Change should not be viewed by clinicians as a compulsion, but rather as an opportunity. That is why, along with a deep understanding of techniques and archetypes of designs, people matters [37][38][39][40].…”

Section: Fourth Specification: People Mattersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organisational design for health integrated delivery systems: Theory and practice

Lega

2007

Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The process of developing competencies is at least partly political because it allows the government to influence what are included as important competencies and to allocate resources based on outcomes of performance. 11 12 A recent review of published evaluative studies of competency based training found an increase in administrative burden but no convincing beneficial effects on motivating students, work performance, or relevance to the needs of industry 11…”

Section: The Birth Of the Competency Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competency based medical training: review * Commentary: The baby is thrown out with the bathwater

Leung

2002

BMJ

Self Cite

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managers and professionals: competing ideologies

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance

Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance

Organisational design for health integrated delivery systems: Theory and practice

Competency based medical training: review * Commentary: The baby is thrown out with the bathwater

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About