تحلیل مولفه های ارزیابی ذینفعان بیمارستان های دانشگاه علوم پزشکی گیلان با رویکرد کیفی
محورهای موضوعی : -مدیریت خدمات بهداشتی و درمانی
سیده رقیه حسنی ضیابری
1
(دانشجوی دکتری، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران)
سعید باقرسلیمی
2
(استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران)
مهدی همایون فر
3
(استادیار، گروه مدیریت صنعتی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران)
کلید واژه: روش دلفی, مدلسازی ساختاری تفسیری, بیمارستان, ارزیابی, ذینفع سازمانی,
چکیده مقاله :
مقدمه: امروزه پاسخگویی مناسب به انتظارات ذینفعان، از مهم ترین عوامل اثربخشی سازمان ها به ویژه در نظام بهداشت و درمان به عنوان متولی ایجاد، ترویج و ارتقای سلامت، به شمار می رود. پژوهش حاضر قصد دارد با تحلیل شاخص های ارزیابی ذینفعان، اطلاعات کاربردی را جهت مدیریت ذینفعان در اختیار روسای بیمارستان های دانشگاه علوم پزشکی گیلان قرار دهد.روش پژوهش: این پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر روش اجرا، توصیفی - پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل؛ رؤسای بیمارستان های دانشگاه علوم پزشکی گیلان و خبرگان دانشگاهی است که 19 نفر از آنها در فرایند اجرای پژوهش مشارکت داشته اند. برای غربالگری مؤلفه های استخراج شده از مبانی نظری پژوهش، از روش دلفی فازی و به منظور ساختاردهی و تحلیل وضعیت مؤلفه ها از مدل سازی ساختاری تفسیری و تحلیل میک مک استفاده شده است. بعلاوه، جهت گردآوری داده ها از روش نمونه گیری گلوله برفی و ابزار پرسشنامه استفاده شده است.یافته ها: با اجرای روش دلفی، از میان 30 مؤلفه استخراج شده از مبانی نظری، 10 عامل؛ مشارکت ذینفع، اطلاعات ذینفع، ارتباطات ذینفع، میزان نیاز ذینفع، منافع همکاری با ذینفع، انگیزه ذینفع، توانایی برنامه ریزی ذینفع، همراستایی اهداف ذینفع با سازمان، امکان نظارت بر ذینفع و اهمیت و جایگاه ذینفع به عنوان عوامل اساسی تعیین شدند و با رویکرد مدل سازی ساختاری تفسیری در سه سطح، ساختاردهی گردیدند.نتیجه گیری: با توجه به تحلیل میک مک، شاخص های مشارکت ذینفع، ارتباطات ذینفع و اهمیت جایگاه ذینفع به عنوان مهم‌ترین مولفه های ارزیابی ذینفعان شناخته شدند که لزوم توجه مدیریت به این عوامل را در ارزیابی ذینفعان و استفاده از آنها در دستیابی به اهداف بیمارستان نشان می دهد.
Introduction: Nowadays, responding appropriately to the stakeholders’ expectations is one of the most important factors for organizations effectiveness, especially in the health system, as the responsible of generation, propagation and promotion of health in societies. Analyzing the stakeholders’ evaluation components, this research aims to provide practical information about stakeholders’ management for the head of hospitals in Guilan University of medical science (GUMC). Methods: This research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-survey in terms of implementation method. Statistical population includes heads of hospitals in GUMS and academic experts where 19 of them are participated in the research. For screening the components extracted from the literature, fuzzy Delphi method was used, while for analyzing and structuring the components, interpretive structural modeling (ISM) was used. In addition, for data gathering, snowball sampling method and questionnaire tool were used. Results: Conducting the fuzzy Delphi method, among the 30 components extracted from the literature, 10 factors; stakeholders’ participation, information, relationships, level of need, benefits of cooperation, motivation, planning ability, consistency with the organization goals, possibility of monitoring stakeholders and the importance of the stakeholders’ position were determined as main factors and were structured by the ISM method at three levels. Conclusion: According to the MICMAC analysis, the indicators of stakeholder’ participation, stakeholder relationships and the importance of the stakeholder's position were recognized as the most important components in stakeholder’s evaluation, which indicates the necessity of managers attention to these factors in the evaluation of stakeholders and using them for achieving to hospital goals.
1- Fathi A, Azizi S, Gharache M. The meta-synthesis of effective signaling tointernal and external stakeholders. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 2022; 30: 105-134. [In Persian]
2- Oliver GF, Rabechini R. Stakeholder management influence on trust in a project: A quantitative study. International Journal of Project Management, 2019; 37:131–144.
3- Kamali Y. Methodological Study of Stakeholder Analysis and its Application in Public Policy-making. Management and Development Process Quarterly, 2016; 28(4): 3-30. [In Persian]
4- Freeman RE. The stakeholder approach revisited. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsund Unternehmensethik, 2004; 5(3): 228-254.
5- Harrison JS, Freeman RE, Abreu MCS. Stakeholder Theory As an Ethical Approach to Effective Management: applying the theory to multiple contexts. Review of Business Management, 2015; 17(55): 858-869.
6- Ahangar M, Khandan M, Esmaeili-Givi MR. Stakeholder Identification and Prioritisation in Iranian Public Libraries Using the Interest/Power Matrix. Library and Information Sciences, 2022; 25(1): 244-268. [In Persian]
7- Teder M, Kaimre P. The participation of stakeholders in the policy processes and their satisfaction with results: A case of Estonian forestry policy. Forest Policy and Economics, 2017; 89: 54-62.
8- Izadbakhsh H, Emami SM. Stakeholder Analysis and Modeling of the Key Actors in the Health System Transformation Plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Iranian Public Administration Studies, 2020; 3(2): 131-160. [In Persian]
9- Saghfi F, Abbasi Shahkoh K, Keshkari E. Sustainable value creation framework on stakeholder management (case study: native operating system of Iran). Management tomorrow, 2014; 39(13): 21-42. [In Persian]
10- Miles J, Munoz MP, Bayle-Sempere JT. Low satisfaction and failed relational coordination among relevant stakeholders in Spanish Mediterranean marine protected areas. Journal of Environmental Management,2020;272:111003.
11- Oppong GD, Chan AP, Dansoh CA. Review of stakeholder management performance attributes in construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2017; 35: 1037–1051.
12- Li H, Ng ST, Skitmore M. Stakeholder impact analysis during post-occupancy evaluation of green buildings – A Chinese context. Building and Environment, 2018; 128: 89–95.
13- Wang Y, Li J, Zhang G, Li Y, Asare MH. Fuzzy evaluation of comprehensive benefit in urban renewal based on the perspective of core stakeholders. Habitat International, 2017; 66: 163-170.Ewurum N, Celestine A, Chinelon I. Sustainable Public Housing Delivery in Nigeria: A Conceptual Stakeholder Management Model. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 2020; 11(10): 2222-2855.
14- Sharpe LM, Harwell MG, Jackson GA. Integrated stakeholder prioritization criteria for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021; 282: 11719.
15- Beack D, Stropoli J. Cities through the lens of Stakeholder Theory: A literature review. Cities, 2021; 118: 103377.
16- Franco-Trigo L. Stakeholder Analysis in Health Innovation Planning Processes: A Systematic Scoping Review. Health Policy, 2020; 124(10): 1083-1099.
17- Khamseh AHS, Maleki MR, Tabibi SJ, Tofighi S. Application of Schemeer's stakeholder Analysis to Design an Accreditation Model in Iranian Hospitals. Journal of Military Medicine, 2017; 18(4): 335-343. [In Persian]
18- Feghhi Farahmand N. The Survey of Organizational Stakeholder's Satisfaction with Organizational engineering management and social engineering approach. Sociological studies, 2016; 31: 7-31. [In Persian]
19- Aghaee R, Aghaee A, Najizadeh RMH. Key effective factors on Agile Maintenance in industry using fuzzy Delphi method and Fuzzy DEMATEL. Industrial Management Journal, 2016; 7(4): 641-672. [In Persian]
20- McCollum NL, Kamat PP, Stockwell JA, Travers C, McCracken CE, Thompson B, et.al. Improving Stakeholder Satisfaction: Nitrous Oxide for Peripheral Intravenous Cannulation for Pediatric Procedural Sedation. Journal of Radiology Nursing, 2017; 36(4): 238-241.
21- Vedlūga T, Mikulskienė PB. Stakeholder driven indicators for eHealth performance management. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2017; 36: 82-92.
22- Li THY, Ng ST, Skitmore M. Evaluating stakeholder satisfaction during public participation in major infrastructure and construction projects: A fuzzy approach. Automation in Construction, 2013; 29: 123–135.
23- Raadt B, Bonnet M, Schouten S, Vliet H. The relation between EA effectiveness and stakeholder satisfaction. Journal of Systems and Software, 2010; 83: 1954–1969.
_||_1- Fathi A, Azizi S, Gharache M. The meta-synthesis of effective signaling tointernal and external stakeholders. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 2022; 30: 105-134. [In Persian]
2- Oliver GF, Rabechini R. Stakeholder management influence on trust in a project: A quantitative study. International Journal of Project Management, 2019; 37:131–144.
3- Kamali Y. Methodological Study of Stakeholder Analysis and its Application in Public Policy-making. Management and Development Process Quarterly, 2016; 28(4): 3-30. [In Persian]
4- Freeman RE. The stakeholder approach revisited. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsund Unternehmensethik, 2004; 5(3): 228-254.
5- Harrison JS, Freeman RE, Abreu MCS. Stakeholder Theory As an Ethical Approach to Effective Management: applying the theory to multiple contexts. Review of Business Management, 2015; 17(55): 858-869.
6- Ahangar M, Khandan M, Esmaeili-Givi MR. Stakeholder Identification and Prioritisation in Iranian Public Libraries Using the Interest/Power Matrix. Library and Information Sciences, 2022; 25(1): 244-268. [In Persian]
7- Teder M, Kaimre P. The participation of stakeholders in the policy processes and their satisfaction with results: A case of Estonian forestry policy. Forest Policy and Economics, 2017; 89: 54-62.
8- Izadbakhsh H, Emami SM. Stakeholder Analysis and Modeling of the Key Actors in the Health System Transformation Plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Iranian Public Administration Studies, 2020; 3(2): 131-160. [In Persian]
9- Saghfi F, Abbasi Shahkoh K, Keshkari E. Sustainable value creation framework on stakeholder management (case study: native operating system of Iran). Management tomorrow, 2014; 39(13): 21-42. [In Persian]
10- Miles J, Munoz MP, Bayle-Sempere JT. Low satisfaction and failed relational coordination among relevant stakeholders in Spanish Mediterranean marine protected areas. Journal of Environmental Management,2020;272:111003.
11- Oppong GD, Chan AP, Dansoh CA. Review of stakeholder management performance attributes in construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2017; 35: 1037–1051.
12- Li H, Ng ST, Skitmore M. Stakeholder impact analysis during post-occupancy evaluation of green buildings – A Chinese context. Building and Environment, 2018; 128: 89–95.
13- Wang Y, Li J, Zhang G, Li Y, Asare MH. Fuzzy evaluation of comprehensive benefit in urban renewal based on the perspective of core stakeholders. Habitat International, 2017; 66: 163-170.Ewurum N, Celestine A, Chinelon I. Sustainable Public Housing Delivery in Nigeria: A Conceptual Stakeholder Management Model. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 2020; 11(10): 2222-2855.
14- Sharpe LM, Harwell MG, Jackson GA. Integrated stakeholder prioritization criteria for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021; 282: 11719.
15- Beack D, Stropoli J. Cities through the lens of Stakeholder Theory: A literature review. Cities, 2021; 118: 103377.
16- Franco-Trigo L. Stakeholder Analysis in Health Innovation Planning Processes: A Systematic Scoping Review. Health Policy, 2020; 124(10): 1083-1099.
17- Khamseh AHS, Maleki MR, Tabibi SJ, Tofighi S. Application of Schemeer's stakeholder Analysis to Design an Accreditation Model in Iranian Hospitals. Journal of Military Medicine, 2017; 18(4): 335-343. [In Persian]
18- Feghhi Farahmand N. The Survey of Organizational Stakeholder's Satisfaction with Organizational engineering management and social engineering approach. Sociological studies, 2016; 31: 7-31. [In Persian]
19- Aghaee R, Aghaee A, Najizadeh RMH. Key effective factors on Agile Maintenance in industry using fuzzy Delphi method and Fuzzy DEMATEL. Industrial Management Journal, 2016; 7(4): 641-672. [In Persian]
20- McCollum NL, Kamat PP, Stockwell JA, Travers C, McCracken CE, Thompson B, et.al. Improving Stakeholder Satisfaction: Nitrous Oxide for Peripheral Intravenous Cannulation for Pediatric Procedural Sedation. Journal of Radiology Nursing, 2017; 36(4): 238-241.
21- Vedlūga T, Mikulskienė PB. Stakeholder driven indicators for eHealth performance management. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2017; 36: 82-92.
22- Li THY, Ng ST, Skitmore M. Evaluating stakeholder satisfaction during public participation in major infrastructure and construction projects: A fuzzy approach. Automation in Construction, 2013; 29: 123–135.
23- Raadt B, Bonnet M, Schouten S, Vliet H. The relation between EA effectiveness and stakeholder satisfaction. Journal of Systems and Software, 2010; 83: 1954–1969.