The Importance of Leadership in Healthcare Industry

Question:

Discuss about the Effective Leadership in Health.

Healthcare is a multi-trillion dollar business worldwide. Unlike yesteryears, sound leadership is paramount to provision of quality healthcare. Just like in the corporate world, researchers are beginning to express interest in investigating the kind of leadership needed for the success of the healthcare industry. From the past half of the millennium, leaders have put more emphasis on examining their followers so as to gain insights into the overall organizational culture. However, much remain desired because leadership demands a deep understanding of a people’s (Tohidi and Jabbari, 2012, pp. 858). Culture and leadership pose an intricate relationship that needs to be studied thoroughly. In this essay, we will explore how and why it is important to develop individuals as leaders in the healthcare industry.

The healthcare sector is rapidly becoming dynamic. These changes are associated with the changes of the political and socioeconomic intricacies that are compelling firms in the health sector to explore new ways of keeping pace with complex operational environment (Rashidi, Syed & Zaki, 2015, pp. 33). The sector is plagued by a number of issues ranging from being non-profiteering operators to lack of innovation as a result of lack of adequate funding, and unsupportive leadership approaches (Ali, Metz, & Kulik, 2015, pp. 1270; Miller et al., 2015, pp. 20-21).

As the world is nursing the economy back to health, organizations (including healthcare industry players) are becoming aware of one important truth: not innovating is a risk that cannot be taken. According to Jain (2014, pp. 13), relying on processes and approaches to operations that have helped negate complexities in business in the past is not adequate to guarantee the future success of any organization. This school of thought can be illustrated by research and anecdotal examples described herein.

In early 2010, more than two-thirds of CEOs interviewed cited innovation to be among the three top strategic approaches of staying relevant in business. This number of CEOs was eight points higher than that of a survey conducted in early 2009. An article published in the New York Times late 2011 cited innovation as an integral component for progress and growth and offering of relevant and competitive products and prosperous careers for determined employees.

In early 2011, during the Development Dimensions International (DDI) Global Leadership Forecast, which attended by a little over twelve thousand business leaders from around the globe, innovative and creativity was voiced as a top strategic priority that every leader should incorporate in the day to day running of any organization (Ovidiu-Iliuta, 2014, pp. 1158; Youngbantao & Rompho, 2015, pp. 122). 

Challenges Faced by Healthcare Industry

Nonetheless, creativity, considering all of its accredited standing in the face of perpetual economic insecurity, and insurmountable changes in the technological and the working environment, remains imperative. Healthcare organizations, just like those in the corporate world, are under constant pressure to assume the most meaningful attitude to innovation to foster faster coping with the competitive environment (Jo?czyk, 2014. Pp. 281). Innovations makes it possible for an organization deliver more in the face of diminishing resources, address operation complexities, and design new solutions for their clientele, and even introduce products that healthcare seekers are not aware that they need them.

Every healthcare entity is expressed by a distinctive amalgam of business encounters and calculated concerns. Consequently, every player in the healthcare industry has to make a decision on how he or she will approach innovation. Put differently, the kind of value-added resolutions every healthcare entity required encompasses innovation which is many can cases cannot take off without sound leadership (Ali, Metz, & Kulik, 2015, pp. 1271). Irrespective of what that delineation appears to be, a breakthrough in innovation will undoubtedly enhance an organization’s capacity to create and promote concepts in mass, to, in the words of Peter Sims ‘put countless “little bets” to augument the possibility concepts that will end bringing about a considerable influence on the organization’s operational plans’ (Mathieu, 2015, pp. 5759).

Good leadership promotes creativity which is a social occurrence that not only needs a huge number of people to create but execute also execute ideas. However, creativity also needs that such people are a led by leaders who can interact, and cooperate with them so as to nurture newly created ideas (Tohidi & Jabbari, 2012, pp. 857). Hogan and Coote (2014, pp. 1) describe organizational culture as a means to observing, thinking, understanding, responding common among all healthcare practitioners of a facility, which is mostly profoundly embedded in human minds, and at times it goes undetected. It underscores what is customary, what incorporates, bonds, calms, and thus relegates doubt. It emanates from synchronicity, collaboration and teamwork among the healthcare practitioners. For organizational culture to yield any meaningful results, it is vital for leaders to be resourceful and constantly captivated in innovation activity of a distinct nature, from the revolutionary and breathtaking innovations to marginal modernizations techniques that generate noticeable effects. Healthcare facilities with a desire to innovate have to transform their organizational culture in manner that supports pro-innovative physicians.

The Role of Innovation in Healthcare Industry

Healthcare firms operating in the turbulent and competitive environment can only outdo their competitors through innovation that is supported by the leadership. According to Chen et al. (2012, pp.1271), transformational leadership has proved to bear more fruits than most leadership approaches in expediting organizational creativity in that it focuses upward mobility necessitated by innovative maneuvers (Foster, 2015, pp. 26). Mujeeb and Ahmad (2011, pp. 66) note that transformational leadership fosters an psychologically protected working atmosphere and even participating in designing the right mood for innovation to proliferate. Again, scientifically driven innovative practices inspire most organizations and openly impacts company output. Therefore, the concentration on technical innovativeness resolves the condemnation on that past research for scrutinizing a few markers including the number of copyrights as well as a new product released (Acar & Acar, 2014, pp. 19-20).

Leadership behaviors are found within the framework of organizations, and as result, it is vital to demystify ways in which conditional moderating factors intensify or constrain the efficacy of transformational governance in easing healthcare industry operations.  Scholars and practitioners alike advocate for the conditional variables to be recognized as accompaniments, neutralizers, or alternatives of a leader’s behavioral stimulus (Ashraf, 2016, pp. 201; Ghanavati, 2014, pp. 400). By centering on how moderating factors maneuver, leaders can pinpoint organizational circumstances that promote grander innovation outcomes.

Chen et al. (2012, pp. 1272-3) propositioned conditions of leader authority over creativity; that is, create an atmosphere in which innovative ideas prosper (for example a culture in which innovation is perceived as the primary way to stay on top of the competition) and avail primary resources or benchmark strategies (such as incentive systems to remunerate innovative endeavors). Stated differently, innovative outcomes tend to happen when organizational practices espouse innovative practices and when groundbreaking practices are remunerated. Consequently, this study investigates the regulating impacts of innovative culture and inducement reparation on the transformational governance–technical creativity correlation (Park, Lee, & Kim, 2016, pp. 317-18). Ever since the concept of transformational leadership was conceived in the late 1980s, a lot research has concentrated on the efficiency of this leadership style with regards to utilization by the top the executive leadership while responding to the dynamism in the corporate environments and recently in the the healthcare industry.

Several intellectuals have depicted transformational leadership as embodying discrete entities such as charisma, influence, intellectual and ideological stimulation, motivation nurturing the acknowledgment and group goals, upholding unparalleled performance anticipations, and offering personalized support and tailored consideration (Naranjo-Valencia et al., 2016, pp. 30; Youngbantao & Rompho, 2015, pp. 124). Successive investigations have revealed that some of these constituents are significant inter- linked or alike to each other (McKee et al., 2011, pp. 235). All these aspects of leadership are integral in organizational management and the healthcare industry alike.

Leadership Styles and Innovation

Authoritative leadership style is perceived by most people as an ideal in fostering impeccable self- approval and self- respect among workers (Lutz, Smith, & Da Silva, 2013, pp. 25). Healthcare practitioners who work under authoritative management project reliability, independent-mindedness and razor-sharp concentration in their pursuant of set goals.

Authoritative leadership has well-defined aims and objectives, and superior benchmarks to be realized by the physicians (Hofstetter & Harpaz, 2015, pp. 450). As such, healthcare leaders can supervise their employees intimately with regards to their behavior anchored on sound approach to care decisions. Supervision also inspires healthcare practitioners to examine their missteps in order to arrive at better judgments in future undertakings. Despite its robustness, authoritative management is at times warm, encouraging and gentle, affectionate and acknowledging in approach.  According to Kacem and El Harbi (2014, pp. 300), corporations and healthcare organizations observing authoritarian leadership style hardly nurture innovation. This is because physicians are closely monitored and coerced into following a specific hospital schedule.

Democratic leadership style is participatory in nature although the democratic leader is entitled to make the final decisions. This is because of it because it banks on employee involvement in all the activities undertaken by a firm. The general aspiration of a representative leader is to inspire employees’ investment of time and effort in the organization. It performs a critical function towards the fulfillment of the organization and idiosyncratic goals and also aids in talent developed ( Chen et al., 2012, pp. 1270).

Representative leadership approach is considered to be among the most fruitful in that it puts more weight on leaders working together and supporting the followers. More often than not, democratic leadership welcomes junior healthcare staff into the discussions aimed at arriving at important decisions. This approach to leadership also addresses organizational disputes amicably and easily. The leader is normally expected to implement the decisions made after taking contributions of the members into account. In addition, this style guarantees physician involvement and commitment in hospital affairs which ultimately improves healthcare services. Facilities under the management of democratic bosses are most likely boost the morale of the healthcare workers leading to substantial resolutions to challenges. This mostly leads to atmosphere togetherness at every level (Ljungholm, 2014, pp. 110). These categories of leaders take it upon themselves to make sure that all physicians set accurate and feasible objectives that are meant to steer both facility and personal success. The leaders come to make annual plans together with their junior hospital staff as equals. The healthcare workers can take part during appraisals of their own efforts.

Transformational Leadership in Healthcare Industry

Representative leadership, however, works best for leaders with desires to keeping their work force well-informed on issues affecting the organization and even those who appreciate their employees’ contributions in arriving at solutions to organizational challenges. It can yield more fruits for healthcare organizations that are devoted to offering continual prospects for the workforce in an attempt to ensuring perpetual growth and satisfactory degrees of job induced satisfaction. Leaders with a thirst for team work and coordination easily manage to nurture a representative leadership (Zhou et al., 2014, pp. 1267-68).

Nonetheless, other authors disagree with many authors to by emphasizing that democratic leadership only works best for managers who are vastly flexible and open to new ideas. In an exceedingly competent and qualified working place, the workforce perpetually services on every day basis that courtesy of democratic leadership. As such, the leader needs to be as much competent as well to keep with the gait with innovativeness generated by the followers. This leadership style is also attributed to the leaders’ ability to exploit the talents and strengths of every physician, which when coalesced create the influence of the whole. If a section of a healthcare facility or the entire facility aspires to instigate major operative transformations or when a leader desires to address issues prevailing between personalities and groups of workers, going democratic in resolving it is the only choice.

Despite the alluring benefits,   democratic leadership style is has its negatives. There are innumerable situations when it is not applicable. For example, when the approach is not generating agreeable outcomes regarding cost-effectiveness and time-effectiveness with respect to considering everyone’s contribution, not many healthcare or corporate organizations find democratic path appealing.

A democratic leader has to ensure that all communication channels accessible. By so doing, they propagate the belief that leadership is an ambition but not a preference. This seems to be in line with the fortitude of unrestricted negotiations aimed at striking a reasonable equilibrium between fresh ideologies and maintaining current operational plans in motion. In making sure all goes well, this type of leader always respects and takes into deliberation all ideas suggestions by everyone attending the meeting. The leaders must also be ready to express and foster high confidence and certainty in themselves and their followers. The leaders elaborate their alternatives but never express regret for the path not chosen. This style of leadership calls for persuasive and sound individuals who are certain to commit to astronomical levels of flexibility. This is because as stated previously, experienced and competent personnel will keep on innovating ways of carrying out healthcare facility interests. It requires leaders who are steadfast enough in employees’ responding innovativeness. As such, it calls for leaders who are bold and successful enough to advance a vibrant working environment for physicians who are zealous to thrive in their undertakings.

Conclusion

Different leaders approach their duties from viewpoints. All the celebrated leaders from around the globe have led their people in their unique ways but the results achieved are appealing to everyone’s eyes. Great leadership is focused on the people. In the healthcare industry great leadership should be focused on the patients. In most times, noble business leaders tend to funnel efforts towards refining the quality of life of the people they serve rather promoting themselves. They hardily show desire to misuse public resources. Despite, the temptations and pressure misappropriate sources; visionary leaders manage to suppress the urge so as to serve the interests of the organization and the employees. Noble leadership understands that it poses an influence on the implementation of organizational policy. The simple reason for this is that leaders and employees work together in that without employees, the leadership alone can execute company policy. When people come together for whatever reason, it is important to have rules to guide the people as they strife to relation comply with standards and benchmarks set. In such instances, leadership is tasked with overseeing that there are restrictions and rewards put in place to preside over implementation of public policies.

References

Acar, A. Z., & Acar, P. (2014). Organizational culture types and their effects on organizational performance in Turkish hospitals. EMAJ: Emerging Markets Journal, 3(3), 18-31. doi:10.5195/emaj.2014.47

Ali, M., Metz, I., & Kulik, C. T. (2015). The impact of work-family programs on the relationship between gender diversity and performance. Human Resource Management, 54(4), 553-576. doi:10.1002/hrm.21631

Ashraf, A. A. (2016). Total quality management, knowledge management and corporate culture: how do they synchronized for performance excellence. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 10(1), 200-211.

Chen, M. Y. C., Lin, C. Y. Y., Lin, H. E., & McDonough III, E. F. (2012). Does transformational leadership facilitate technological innovation? The moderating roles of innovative culture and incentive compensation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(2), 239-264.

Foster, P. L. (2015). A positive corporate culture builds a foundation for innovation. Baylor Business Review, 12.

Ghanavati, M. (2014). The Effect of Corporate Culture and Market Orientation on Iranian Industrial SMEs’ Performance. Iranian Journal of Management Sciences: A Quarterly, 7(2), 399-422.

Hofstetter, H., & Harpaz, I. (2015). Declared versus actual organizational culture as indicated by an organization’s performance appraisal. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(4), 445-466. doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.561217

Hogan, S. J., & Coote, L. V. (2014). Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A test of Schein’s model. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1609-1621.

Jain, R. (2014). Innovation promotion strategies: a conceptual framework. South Asian Journal of Management, 21(2), 44.

Jo?czyk, J. (2014). The relationship between organizational culture and innovation in the opinion of the medical staff of public hospitals. Hyperion International Journal Of Econophysics & New Economy, 7(2), 277-292.

Kacem, S., & El Harbi, S. (2014). Leadership, innovation among Tunisian ict SMES. Journal Of Enterprising Culture, 22(3), 283-311. doi:10.1142/S0218495814500125

Ljungholm, D. P. (2014). The performance effects of transformational leadership in public administration. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, (1), 110-115.

Lutz Allen, S., Smith, J. E., & Da Silva, N. (2013). Leadership style in relation to organizational change and organizational creativity: perceptions from nonprofit organizational members. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 24(1), 23-42. doi:10.1002/nml.21078

Mathieu, C. (2015). Can creativity be bad for an organization? Dark personalities, creativity/innovation, and leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 9(3), 57-59.

McKee, M. C., Driscoll, C., Kelloway, E. K., & Kelley, E. (2011). Exploring linkages among transformational leadership, workplace spirituality and well-being in health care workers. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 8(3): 233–255.

Miller, D., Wright, M., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Scholes, L. (2015). Resources and innovation in family businesses: the Janus-face of socio-emotional preferences. California Management Review, 58(1), 20-40. doi:10.1525/cmr.2015.58.1.20

Mujeeb, E. u., & Ahmad, M. S. (2011). Impact of organizational culture on performance management practices in Pakistan. International Management Review, 7(2), 52-57.

Naranjo-Valencia, J. C., Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2016). Studying the links between organizational culture, innovation, and performance in Spanish companies. Revista Latinoamericana De Psicología, 48(1), 30-41. doi:10.1016/j.rlp.2015.09.009

Ovidiu-Iliuta, D. (2014). The link between organizational culture and performance management practices: a case of it companies from Romania. Annals of the University of Oradea. Economic Science Series, 23(1), 1156-1163.

Park, J., Lee, K., & Kim, P. S. (2016). Participative management and perceived organizational performance: the moderating effects of innovative organizational culture. Public Performance & Management Review, 39(2), 316-336. doi:10.1080/15309576.2015.1108773

Rashidi, Z., Syed, N. A., & Zaki, S. (2015). Profiling organizational culture of different sectors in Pakistan. IBA Business Review, 10(1), 31-46.

Tohidi, H., & Jabbari, M. M. (2012). Organizational culture and leadership. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 856-860.

Youngbantao, U., & Rompho, N. (2015). The uses of measures in performance prism in different organizational cultures. Journal of Accounting & Finance (2158-3625), 15(6), 122-128.

Zhou, J., Ma, Y., Cheng, W., & Xia, B. 2014, Mediating role of employee emotions in the relationship between authentic leadership and employee innovation. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(8), 1267-1278.