Scenario 1
Our group defined the success of the merger based on several outcomes. First of all, financial stability within the first two years of the merger; the formation of value-based payment models or other innovative payment structures which appeal to both payers and employers; low employee turnover, at or below the national benchmark; high employee engagement levels based on national benchmarks for the healthcare industry and finally the maintenance of accreditation. Once we defined success, we built out the following steps to work towards these outcomes. First, we would perform a thorough stakeholder analysis and define the roles and responsibilities of each. Secondly, we would engage these stakeholders (e.g. patients, board members, employee, physician, local community leaders) in constructing the vision and strategic goals of the merged entity. Thirdly, the deployment of specific human capital management strategies would be a
…show more content…
First of all, both scenarios represent emotionally charged situations that impact many stakeholders both internally (employees, patients, providers and board members) and externally (payers, community, government entities, community leaders). There is no doubt that the knowledge I have gained over the course of this program allowed me to have a broader understanding of the implications for each of these stakeholders. Furthermore, not only having knowledge of the perspectives of these various stakeholders but also the tools to critically assess the situation and formulate a plan is also a byproduct of my studies. Additionally, this work highlights the complex and fragmented nature of the US health system and the challenges in working on a solution to almost any problem tackled by healthcare leaders today. Thankfully, the program has given me the confidence to undertake these
Shi, L., & Singh, D. A. (2015). Delivering health care in America: A systems approach (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning
The national debate over health care reform in the US has been going on for decades. Although the debate continues, the landscape of health care in the US is certainly about to change as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) was enacted on March 23, 2010. Many politicians, economists, health care providers and average citizens have weighed in on the topic with opinions as diverse as the country. The question is, will this reform be the cure for our
Health Care in the United States is a vast industry that has many different types of people involved in the delivery of care. There are stakeholders that affect the daily operations of health care and they are not necessarily in a hospital setting. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, AHRQ, defines a “stakeholder” as persons or groups who have a vested interest in the clinical decision and the evidence that supports that decision ("Effective health care," 2011, p. 1). These stakeholders are making decisions that impact costs, procedures, and the future of
Healthcare in the United States has reached a level of complexity which has perplexed Presidents, Congressional members and private industry for over a century (Palmer, 1999). While the healthcare system has evolved over the last century, policy decisions which have attempted to effectuate changes to cost, quality and access have been
Before change can be made, a problem must be recognized. Progressive politicians, health care executives, and activists continuously shed light on the dysfunctions within today’s health care system.
The article that I selected for this week’s review focuses on the reaction of hospitals over the most recent draft of the GOP healthcare bill, The Better Care Reconciliation Act. The bill stands to generate major cuts to Medicaid funding. The bill, which was just released today, is already drawing up skepticism and opposition by hospital groups. Rick Pollack, president and CEO of the American Hospital Association, stated, “If enacted, the Better Care Reconciliation Act would mean real consequences for real people — among them people with chronic conditions such as cancer, individuals with disabilities who need long-term services and support, and the elderly" (Leonard, 2017). Those who are in most need of healthcare services and are on Medicaid
In America, health care has become a big controversy. Recently politicians have tried to create the perfect health care system that works for everyone. As one can imagine it is pretty hard to find a single health care plan to work for over 300 million people. Since our country began the states, not the federal government, have been given the challenge of finding a healthcare system that will work for everyone. Prior to the colonial era colonist and native americans handled domestic
There has been an increase of mergers between hospitals throughout the nation. Two hundred and nine transactions of mergers and acquisitions were conducted just between 2010 and 2013. (Budryk, 2014) It is controversial weather mergers in healthcare are of benefit to the community.
When faced with the reality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) becoming law and taking effect, Jim began to implement new rules and guidelines. Although impravision a strategic plan the institution is expected to follow as supplies and resources would soon be in critical demand. As CEO, he understood what was expected of the health care system, focusing mainly on the organizational needs that will help with the expanding or the growing populationu8, meeting the increased demand for the future. Via industrialized existing programs and building clinics that will accommodate the expected significant impact of the newly insured. “Eliminating ED crowding will take the collective involvement of healthcare workers, business leaders, politicians, the press, and the public” (Derlet & Richards, 2008). After much consideration, and a comprehensive evaluation of the documents for the new Affordable Care Act, Jim James, CEO thought about the upcoming opportunities using a persuasive approach to transform the hospital. Since he stated that his most pressing desire is to find ways to connect the recipients in a way that will model changes in existing programs. Admittinly, we have a medical (that is, sick) care system- a system that waits until we become ill before it kicks into action instead of a healthcare system focused on helping us stay healthy (Schimpff, 2012). The justification, seeing the possibilities that crucial in dealing with changes in the upcoming health care system using a
Jim James, the CEO of _______, when faced with the reality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) becoming law and taking effect, began to implement new rules and guidelines for his institution. Although improvising a strategic plan the institution is expected to follow as supplies and resources would soon be in critical demand. As CEO, he understood what was expected of the health care system, focusing mainly on the organizational needs that will help with the expanding or growing population and meeting the increased demand for the future. Via industrialized existing programs and building clinics that will accommodate the expected significant impact of the newly insured. “Eliminating ED crowding will take the collective involvement of healthcare workers, business leaders, politicians, the press, and the public” (Derlet & Richards, 2008). After much consideration, and a comprehensive evaluation of the documents for the new Affordable Care Act Jim James thought about the upcoming opportunities using a persuasive approach to transform the hospital. Since he stated that his most pressing desire is to find ways to connect the recipients in a way that will model changes in existing programs. Admittedly, we have a medical, acute care, care system- a system that waits until we become ill before it kicks into action instead of a healthcare system focused on helping us stay healthy (Schimpff, 2012). The justification, seeing the possibilities that are crucial in dealing with changes in
Healthcare in the United States is facing numerous issues within the current and future turbulent times. I believe that two major issues are the disparity of provision of healthcare to varying societal groups as well as the projected shortfall of healthcare providers to adequately service the population in general.
In an eerie parallel, the last eight weeks of this course have been peppered with real life experiences of the healthcare system in America. Specifically, with the treatment and care of my well insured chronically ill mother and underinsured/uninsured entrepreneurial/small business owner brother and sister and the difference in which their healthcare stories are playing out. Yet, this course has also seasoned my perspective of what to expect in the future. Which is “that the current model of healthcare delivery …is not sustainable” (Dieppe & Roe, 2015, p. 22).
The health care system must change to improve our nation’s health and takes strong steps to address the unsustainable growth of health care costs in America. We still have a long way to go before our health system become effective. We still have population that do not have insurance, have difficulties accessing their health care, or their needs are not met within the healthcare system. It is an investment in prevention and wellness and increasing access to primary care physician.
The object of this reaction paper is the continued exploration of the ramifications of policy making in the reinvention of health care. The premise of the panel discussion was the current American health care system is financially unsustainable and morally untenable. Further, the current health care delivery system is not meeting the basic health care needs of societal members. Despite having the costliest per capita health care spending in the world, our health care outcomes lag behind most developed countries, including those with socialized medicine.
Creating a health care reform plan for the U.S. health care system is no easy task. Multiple things must be taken into consideration. These include making insurance affordable, making sure the plan is economically feasible, and creating a plan that will still work in the future. What hindered the reshaping of health care into a sustainable system in the past, are the health sectors interests that prefer the status quo. By continuing to cling on to yesterday’s model, the health care industry is creating its own peril (Schaeffer, 2007).