طراحی مدل دوسوتوانی سازمانی مبتنی بر رهبری دانش‌گرا در سازمان‌های خدمات بهداشتی درمانی استان کرمان

محورهای موضوعی : -مدیریت خدمات بهداشتی و درمانی

عزیزه عزیزیان ¹ ( دانشجوی دکتری، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد کرمان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمان، ایران )
امین نیکپور ² ( دانشیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد کرمان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمان، ایران )
زهرا شکوه ³ ( استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد کرمان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمان، ایران )
مهدی محمدباقری ⁴ ( استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد کرمان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمان، ایران )

تاریخ دریافت : 1401/04/06 تاریخ پذیرش : 1401/05/19 تاریخ انتشار : 1401/03/01

کلید واژه: رهبری دانش‌گرا, دوسوتوانی سازمانی, سازمان‌های خدمات بهداشتی درمانی,

چکیده مقاله :

مقدمه: دوسوتوانی سازمانی و رهبری از عوامل رشد و پیشرفت در سازمان ها محسوب می شوند. هدف از این پژوهش طراحی مدل دوسوتوانی سازمانی مبتنی بر رهبری دانش گرا در سازمان های خدمات بهداشتی درمانی استان کرمان است. روش پژوهش: پژوهش حاضر توصیفی است که به روش پیمایشی انجام شده است و از نظر هدف، از نوع پژوهش‌های توسعه‌ای ـ کاربردی است. جامعه آماری پژوهش، کارکنان سازمان های خدمات بهداشتی درمانی استان کرمان به تعداد ۱۹۳۵۸ نفر می‌باشد که حجم نمونه ۵۸۶ نفر بر اساس ۵ تا ۱۰ برابر تعداد سؤالات پرسشنامه در نظر گرفته شده است. به منظور تجزیه و تحلیل داده ها از روش آمار توصیفی و استنباطی استفاده شده و ابزار گردآوری داده ها، پرسشنامه های محقق ساخته رهبری دانش‌گرا و دوسوتوانی سازمانی است. یافته‌ها: یافته ها ضمن تأیید مدل پیشنهادی، نشان داد که رهبری دانش گرا بر دوسوتوانی سازمانی و ابعاد آن (اکتشاف و بهره‌برداری) در سازمان های خدمات بهداشتی درمانی تأثیر مثبت و معناداری دارد و تأثیر رهبری دانش گرا بر بُعد اکتشاف بیشتر از بُعد بهره برداری بوده است. نتیجه‌گیری: می‌توان نتیجه گرفت که رهبری دانش گرا بر دوسوتوانی سازمانی (اکتشاف و بهره برداری) تأثیر مثبت و افزایشی (مستقیم) دارد و توانایی سازمان‌های خدمات بهداشتی درمانی برای کشف فرصت های جدید و همچنین بهره برداری از شایستگی‌های موجود در این زمینه و برقراری دوسوتوانی سازمانی، مستلزم به کارگیری سبک رهبری دانش گرا در سازمان است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Introduction: organizational ambidexterity and leadership are considered factors of growth and development in organizations. The purpose of this study was to design an organizational ambidexterity model based on knowledge oriented leadership in health care service organizations in Kerman province. Methods: The present study is descriptive which has been done by survey method. Also in terms of purpose, this study is developmental- applied research. The statistical population of the study is employees of health care service organizations in Kerman province that the sample size of 586 people is based on 5 to 10 times the number of questions in the questionnaire. In order to analyze the data, descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used and the tools of data collection are researcher-made questionnaire of knowledge oriented leadership and organizational ambidexterity. Results: Findings while confirming the proposed model, showed that knowledge oriented leadership has a positive and significant effect on organizational ambidexterity and its dimensions (exploration and exploitation) in health care organizations and the effect of knowledge oriented leadership on the dimension of exploration has been more than the exploitation dimension. Conclusion: It can be concluded that knowledge-oriented leadership has a positive and increasing (direct) effect on organizational ambidexterity (exploration and exploitation) and the ability of health care service organizations to discover new opportunities and also exploit existing competencies in this context and establishment of organizational ambidexterity requires the use of knowledge-oriented leadership style in the organization.

منابع و مأخذ:

1- Wang R, Gibbons P. Understanding managerial ambidexterity: A people-situation interaction approach. Journal of Strategy and Management, 2020; 14(2): 170-186.

2- Ghorehjili S, rahmati MS, pourkarimi J. Ambidexterity leadership Components: A Meta-synthesis Study. Journal of Teaching in Marine Sciences, 2019; 6 (1): 123-138. [In Persian]

3 Mercedes U, Garcia1 E, Claver C., Bartolome ML, Patrocinio ZZ. Toward dynamic organizational ambidexterity in the hotel industry: The role of human resources, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 2016; 57 (4): 367-378.

4- Mohammad F, Ahammad Keith W, Glaister & Paulina Junni. Organizational ambidexterity and human resource practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2019; 30(4): 503-507.

5- O’Reilly CA, Tushman ML. Ambidexterity as a Capability: Resolving the innovator’s Dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 2008; 28: 185- 206.

6- Iqbal Z, Ghazanfar F. Ambidextrous leadership and change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Mediating role of trust in leader. International Journal of Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity, 2019; 10: 13-25.

7- Lee Y, Cortes AF, Zhuang Y, Herrmann P. Social capital and organizational ambidexterity: the moderating effect of absorptive capacity. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2020; 16 (8): 1746-8809.

8- Yu T, Patersson PG, Ruyter KD. Achieving service-sales ambidexterity. Journal of Service Research, 2012; 16 (1): 52-66.

9- Posch A, Garaus C. Relationship between strategic planning and organizational ambidexterity. Long Range Planning, 2020; 53(6): 1-14.

10- Vakili Y, Nazari K, Khastar H, Shahriari SA. Model of Ambidextrous Organization for Banking Industry. Innovation Management in Defense Organizations, 2021; 3(4): 29-50. [In Persian]

11- Kaviani H, Fath Abadi H, Manoichehri KJ. The effect of human resource flexibility on organizational ambiguity in military units. Journal of Human Resource Management, 2018; 8(3): 91-116. [In Persian]

12- Gurlek M, Çemberci M. Understanding the relationships among knowledge-oriented leadership, knowledge management capacity, Innovation performance and organizational performance: A serial mediation analysis. Kybernetes Journal, 2020; 49 (11): 2819-2846.

13- Jones G. Sallis E. Knowledge management in education: Enhancing learning & education. London: Kogan page: 2013: 114.

14- Zhang L, Guo H. Enabling knowledge diversity to benefit crossfunctional project teams: Joint roles of knowledge leadership and transactive memory system. Information & Management, 2019; 56: 103-120.

15- Yang LR, Huang CF, Hsu TJ. Knowledge leadership to improve project and organizational performance. International Journal of Project Management, 2014; 32 (1): 40–53.

16- Jafari M, Seyedjavadi M, Zaboli R. Role of scientific authority in the development process in Iran: A systematic review of domestic studies. Journal of Medical Education Development, 2020; 13(39): 35-48. [In Persian].

17- Donate MJ. Sanchez de Pablo JD. The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 2015; 68(2): 360-370.

18- Sadeghi A, Poor Mohammad F. Management and supervision in health care centers. Tehran: Jamee negar publishers: 2020: 2^th Edition. [In Persian].

19- Jansen JJ, George G, Van den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW. Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 2008; 45 (5): 982-1007.

20- Mario J, Donate Jesús D, Sanchez de Pablo. The role of knowledge- oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 2015; 68 (2): 360–370.

21- Baskarada S, Watson J. Cromarty J. Leadership and organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Development, 2016; 35 (6): 778-788.

22- Coleman NJ. An Exploration of the leadership behaviors and ambidexterity in online learning units. Doctor of Education thesis: The Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Gorge Washington University: 2016.

23- Mohammadi S, Nadaf M, Mosavi F. Explaining the mediating role of organizational ambidexterity (exploration and exploitation) in the impact of transformational leadership on entrepreneurial awareness (case study: one of the subsidiaries of the National Company of Southern Oil Regions). Journal of Explration and Production Oil and Gas. 2020; 178: 19-28. [In Persian].

24- Alneadi KM, Almatrooshi MJ, Khalifa GSA, Aidie SA EI, Kemat Alhaj b, Morsy MA. Linking knowledge oriented leadership and innovation towards organizational performance. Academic Leadership, 2020; 21 (4): 107-118.

25- Heydari P, Vahdat S, Soltani H. Provide a model of health financing system with emphasis on structural, contextual, instrumental and content factors. Health Management, 2020; 11(1): 87-99. [In Persian]

26- Rezaei B. Leadership style of nursing managers and its relationship with some personal characteristics (Case study: Social Security hospitals in Isfahan province). Health Management, 2015; 6 (4), 29-39. [In Persian]

27- Westlan JC. Lower bounds on sample size in structural equation modeling. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2010; 9(6): 476-487.

28- Shehzad MU, Davvis K, Ahmad MSh. Knowledge-oriented leadership and open innovation: The mediating role of knowledge process and infrastructure capability. International Journal of Innovation Management, 2021; 25 (3): 7-3.

29- Smith WK, Tushman ML. Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation. Organization Science, 2005; 16 (5): 522–536

30- Donate MJ, Gonzalez- Mohino M, Appio F, Bernhard F. Dealing with knowledge hiding to improve innovation capabilities in the hotel industry: The unconventional role of knowledge-oriented leadership. Journal of Business Research, 2022; 144: 572-586.

31- Yasir M, Majid A, Yasir M. Nexus of knowledge-management enablers, trust and knowledge-sharing in research universities. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 2017; 9(3): 424-438.

32- Rehman UU, Ighbal A. Nexus of knowledge- oriented leadership, knowledge management, innovation and organizational performance in higher education. Business Process Management Journal, 2020: 1-28.