Article

Organisational culture: variation across hospitals and connection to patient safety climate

Department of Medicine, Center for Health Services Research, Veterans Affairs Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee 37232, USA.
Quality and Safety in Health Care (Impact Factor: 2.16). 12/2010; 19(6):592-6. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2009.039511
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Bureaucratic organisational culture is less favourable to quality improvement, whereas organisations with group (teamwork) culture are better aligned for quality improvement.
To determine if an organisational group culture shows better alignment with patient safety climate.
Cross-sectional administration of questionnaires. Setting 40 Hospital Corporation of America hospitals.
1406 nurses, ancillary staff, allied staff and physicians.
Competing Values Measure of Organisational Culture, Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), Safety Climate Survey (SCSc) and Information and Analysis (IA).
The Cronbach alpha was 0.81 for the group culture scale and 0.72 for the hierarchical culture scale. Group culture was positively correlated with SAQ and its subscales (from correlation coefficient r = 0.44 to 0.55, except situational recognition), ScSc (r = 0.47) and IA (r = 0.33). Hierarchical culture was negatively correlated with the SAQ scales, SCSc and IA. Among the 40 hospitals, 37.5% had a hierarchical dominant culture, 37.5% a dominant group culture and 25% a balanced culture. Group culture hospitals had significantly higher safety climate scores than hierarchical culture hospitals. The magnitude of these relationships was not affected after adjusting for provider job type and hospital characteristics.
Hospitals vary in organisational culture, and the type of culture relates to the safety climate within the hospital. In combination with prior studies, these results suggest that a healthcare organisation's culture is a critical factor in the development of its patient safety climate and in the successful implementation of quality improvement initiatives.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Robert Alan Greevy, Jun 21, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
309 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The contemporary corporate, unlike the traditional organizations is less structured, less bureaucratic, flatter and more employee focused. Employee effectiveness may be the single largest differentiator between the ‘best’ and ‘not so best’ organizations. Owing to this phenomenon employers have started to observe and perhaps even expect certain optional behaviors out of their employees which fall beyond the purview of specific job requirements and reward systems. These extra role behaviors tend to promote long service periods and those who perform them are known as good “organizational citizens.” Since the liberalization in 1991 in India, the industries have gone through a monumental change. The work culture and the mindset of people have also drastically changed over the past two decades. The present paper is an attempt to examine and investigate the impact of Organizational Culture on Citizenship Behaviors of the employees in an Organization in different sectors of the economy. Specifically the paper explores the extent of Impact that individual components of Organizational Culture have on Citizenship Behaviors in different cultural settings.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient safety concerns have focused attention on organisational and safety cultures, in turn directing attention to the measurement of organisational and safety climates. First, to compare levels of agreement between survey- and observation-based measures of organisational and safety climates/cultures and to compare both measures with criterion-based audits of the quality of care, using evidence-based markers drawn from national care standards relating to six common clinical conditions. (This required development of an observation-based instrument.) Second, to examine whether observation-based evaluations could replace or augment survey measurements to mitigate concerns about declining response rates and increasing social desirability bias. Third, to examine mediating factors in safety and organisational climate scores. The study had three strands: (A) a postal questionnaire survey to elicit staff perceptions of organisational and safety climates, using six prevalidated scales; (B) semistructured non-participant observation of clinical teams; and (C) a retrospective criterion-based audit carried out by non-clinical auditors to minimise hindsight bias. Standardised summary scores were created for each strand, and pairs of measurements were compared (strand A with strand B, strand A with strand C, and strand B with strand C) using Bland-Altman plots to evaluate agreement. Correlations were also examined. Multilevel modelling of Strand A scores explored mediating factors. Eight emergency departments and eight maternity units in England, UK. None. Examination of feasibility, correlation and agreement. Strand A: the overall response rate was 27.6%, whereas site-specific rates ranged from 9% to 47%. We identified more mediating factors than previous studies; variable response rates had little effect on the results. Organisational and safety climate scores were strongly correlated (r = 0.845) and exhibited good agreement [standard deviation (SD) differences 0.449; 14 (88%) within ± 0.5; one large difference]. Two commonly used scales had high levels of positive responses, suggesting positive climates or social desirability bias. Strand B: scoring on a four-point scale was feasible. Observational evaluation of teamwork culture was good but too limited for evaluating organisational culture. Strand C: a total of 359-399 cases were audited per condition. The results varied widely between different markers for the same condition, so selection matters. Each site performed well on some markers but not others, with few consistent patterns. Some national guidelines were contested. Comparisons: the comparison of safety climate (survey) and teamwork culture (observation) revealed a moderately low correlation (r = 0.316) and good agreement [SD differences 1.082; 7 (44%) within ±0.5; one large difference]. The comparison of safety climate (survey) and performance (audit) revealed lower correlation (r = 0.150, i.e. relationship not linear) but reasonably good agreement [SD differences 0.992; 9 (56%) within ± 0.5; two large differences]. Comparisons between performance (audit) and both organisational climate (survey) and teamwork culture (observation) showed negligible correlations (< 0.1) but moderately good agreement [SD differences 1.058 and 1.241; 6 (38%) and 7 (44%) within ± 0.5; each with two large differences (at different sites)]. Field notes illuminated large differences. Climate scores from staff surveys are not unduly affected by survey response rates, but increasing use risks social desirability bias. Safety climate provides a partial indicator of performance, but qualitative data are needed to understand discrepant results. Safety climate (surveys) and, to a lesser degree, teamwork culture (observations) are better indicators of performance than organisational climate (surveys) or attempts to evaluate organisational culture from time-limited observations. Scoring unobtrusive, time-limited observations to evaluate teamwork culture is feasible, but the instrument developed for this study needs further testing. A refined observation-based measure would be useful to augment or replace surveys. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
    05/2012; 16(25):iii-iv, 1-184. DOI:10.3310/hta16250
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Improvements in nursing home safety climate could lead to enhanced resident safety. Yet safety climate has been little studied in the nursing home setting, and existing safety climate instruments have significant limitations. To investigate safety climate in Veterans Health Affairs nursing homes (Community Living Centers [CLCs]), this study had two objectives: (a) to develop a resident safety climate instrument for use in CLCs and (b) to assess this instrument’s psychometric properties by administering it in a sample of CLCs. Using a standard conceptual framework, the CLC Employee Survey of Attitudes about Resident Safety was developed with the aid of an expert panel and multiple rounds of cognitive interviews. It was subsequently pilot tested in a sample of CLC employees. After refinement based on the pilot results, it was administered in a sample of five CLCs, where it was found to have adequate reliability and validity.
    Medical Care Research and Review 08/2013; 70(4):400-417. DOI:10.1177/1077558712474349