Journal of healthcare leadership · 2025
Predictors of Perceived Organizational Innovation Among Allied Health and Pharmacy Professionals.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Seah Yuan Zhi, Danial Sophia Song, Chew Lita Sui Tjien, Tong Jasper Weng Kong
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Rising healthcare costs have intensified the need for innovation within healthcare systems, with organizational innovation being seen as a key enabler for the development of strategies to improve affordability and accessibility for long-term sustainable health care delivery. While research has long examined innovation among physicians and nurses, studies focusing on Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) and pharmacists are nascent. This study investigates the innovation culture among AHPs and pharmacists in Singapore's largest healthcare cluster. It specifically examines how components of the Innovation Quotient model-Values, Behaviors, Climate, Processes, Resources, and Success-predict perceived changes in innovation.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed via Email to 4413 AHPs and pharmacists, yielding 620 complete responses. The survey instrument, the InnoQuotient, comprised 54 items categorized into 18 factors that correspond to six building blocks of innovation. Structural equation modeling (SEM) in R Studio evaluated model fit and the relationships between these factors and self-reported change in innovation. Complementing the quantitative analysis, a thematic analysis was conducted using MAXQDA on 65 verbatim responses.
RESULTS: SEM analysis indicated that three innovation building blocks of Behaviors, Processes, and Success were significantly associated with reported innovation change. Specifically, positive innovation change correlated with enhanced Behaviors and Success, whereas a negative relationship between innovation change and Processes suggested that overly centralized and top-down initiatives may impede grassroots innovation. The thematic analysis reinforced these findings by highlighting the pivotal role of leadership in driving effective innovation while also revealing concerns regarding the unilateral implementation of innovation initiatives and the challenges of fostering interdisciplinary collaboration.
CONCLUSION: The findings advocate for a balanced approach that synergizes leadership direction with organic, collaborative efforts to cultivate a robust innovation culture. Future studies should focus on refining strategies to bolster less effective innovation components and include perspectives across different organizational levels.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed via Email to 4413 AHPs and pharmacists, yielding 620 complete responses. The survey instrument, the InnoQuotient, comprised 54 items categorized into 18 factors that correspond to six building blocks of innovation. Structural equation modeling (SEM) in R Studio evaluated model fit and the relationships between these factors and self-reported change in innovation. Complementing the quantitative analysis, a thematic analysis was conducted using MAXQDA on 65 verbatim responses.
RESULTS: SEM analysis indicated that three innovation building blocks of Behaviors, Processes, and Success were significantly associated with reported innovation change. Specifically, positive innovation change correlated with enhanced Behaviors and Success, whereas a negative relationship between innovation change and Processes suggested that overly centralized and top-down initiatives may impede grassroots innovation. The thematic analysis reinforced these findings by highlighting the pivotal role of leadership in driving effective innovation while also revealing concerns regarding the unilateral implementation of innovation initiatives and the challenges of fostering interdisciplinary collaboration.
CONCLUSION: The findings advocate for a balanced approach that synergizes leadership direction with organic, collaborative efforts to cultivate a robust innovation culture. Future studies should focus on refining strategies to bolster less effective innovation components and include perspectives across different organizational levels.