Recent studies have highlighted the importance of management in the health care sector. Positive correlations have been found between clinical and economic performance. Although there is still controversy regarding what kind of management and which managers should lead health care organizations and health systems, we now have interesting evidence to analyze. Starting with a systematic review of the literature, this article presents and discusses the streams of knowledge regarding how management can influence the quality and sustainability of health systems and organizations. Through the analysis of 37 studies, we found that the performance of health care systems and organizations seems to be correlated with management practices, leadership, manager characteristics, and cultural attributes that are associated with managerial values and approaches. There is also evidence that health care organizations run by doctors perform better than others. Finally, we provide a roadmap that indicates how the relationship between the management and performance of health systems and organizations can be further and more effectively investigated.

No abstract

Being largely considered a human right, healthcare needs leaders who are able to make choices and to set directions. Following the recommendations expressed by Gilmartin and D'Aunno's review and roadmap compiled in 2008, today, it is important to acknowledge researchers' contributions to outline this landscape. The realist review of 77 publications answered questions such as "what works, for whom, and in which circumstances" highlighting: the effectiveness and acceptance of transformational and collaborative approaches; professionalism, expertise, and good task delegation within operational teams; distributed leadership, relationships, and social responsibility at a systemic level. The relevancy and need of leadership development programs, framed within a wider strategy, emerged. Nonetheless, gaps still exist and require further investigation: particular needs in public vs. private contexts; professionals' and women's differentiating characters; generational gaps; associations between leadership and recruitment HR practices research; how (and if) leaders (should) influence the organizational culture and values; and developing countries specific challenges. Also, a greater proportion of relevant findings should be drawn by empirical and more rigorous studies. Finally, a major attention could be paid to interactions happening at the team, organizational, and systemic level among different leaders and among leaders, followers and external actors.

The New Public Management wave pressured the management of services mainly toward structural changes to improve performances. However, organizational culture might influence results, especially in settings characterized by strong professional control and political influence on decision-making.This study tests how organizational culture influences performances and investigates whether a specific culture type is most effective in fostering organizational results in a universal and tax-based health system where clinicians are involved in the governance of health organizations. We assess organizational culture through the Competing Values Framework and use multivariate regression analysis to test the relationship between dominant culture type and two dimensions of organizational performance: competitiveness and financial results.In all, 529 senior managers from 59 healthcare organizations responded. Dominant rational and hierarchical culture types are associated, respectively, with higher competitiveness and better financial results.Enhancing a specific performance dimension might require cultural changes aimed to align the dominant cultural values with the targeted results.

Purpose – As a consequence of new public management reforms, leading professionals in public service organizations have increasingly been involved in management roles. The phenomenon of clinical directors in the healthcare sector is particularly representative of this, as this medical manager role has been adopted in many countries around the world. However, professionals’ managerial role taking still falls quite short of expectations. While most research has searched for the causes of this gap at the individual level by exploring the clash between management and professionalism, the purpose of the paper is to argue that a contextualized understanding of the antecedents at the organizational level, and particularly the existing medical management roles, provides a more thorough picture of the reality. Design/methodology/approach – The paper adopts an institutional perspective to study the development of existing medical management roles and the rise of new ones (clinical directors). The analysis focuses on the case of Italy, a country with a tradition in medical management where, following the example of other countries, clinical director roles were introduced by law; yet they were not incisive. The paper is based on a review of the existing literature and extensive field research on Italian clinical directorates. Findings – The paper shows how in contexts in which doctors in management roles exist and are provided with legitimacy deriving from legal norms, historical settlements between professions and taken for granted arrangements, medical management becomes institutionalized, stability prevails and change towards new doctor-in-management roles is seriously hampered. Originality/value – The paper contributes to existing knowledge on professionals’ managerial role taking, underlining the relevance of contextual and nation-specific factors on this process. It provides implications for research and for policy making in healthcare and other professional public services.