Relationships among quality management, IS use and organizational performance in the health care and non-health care setting

Abstract

In this research, we investigate the relationships between organizational adoption and extent of use of Quality Management (QM) programmes and Information Systems (IS) in two somewhat diþ erent organizational settingsÐ health care and non-health care. Speci® cally, we contend that organizations from the two settings may vary considerably in what we term QM Maturity. Some organizations appear to adopt QM only super® cially, while others move far more fully into QM. We use the term QM Maturity to describe organizations that have adopted QM programmes more fully and in`better' ways qualitatively. Are there diþ erences in the paths which health care and non-health care organizations have used in approaching and implementing QM? In this research, we contend that QM Mature organizations will be characterized by perceptions that the culture is diþ erent in ways that are supportive of QM. Moreover, we argue that the higher QM Maturity organizations will approach IS implementation in more mature, qualitatively better ways. In turn, we expect QM Maturity and more mature IS adoption to lead to perceptions by those in the organization that both organizational performance and service quality are better. Where there are diþ erences between health care and non-health care organizations, these areas could be impacted upon as well. Our exploratory research provides support for these ideas and suggests that there may, in fact, be diþ erences in the two settings.

Knowledge management as a mediator for the efficacy of transformational leadership and quality management initiatives in U.S. health care

“…Further, these results provide no support for a direct impact of transformational leadership on organizational performance in hospitals, but they show that this leadership style may actually impact performance indirectly through its effect on increasing knowledge responsiveness. The literature suggests that KM and QM programs could deliver superior results when they are implemented together, such as the advanced KM maturity that follows from QM maturity (Choo et al, 2007;Hartman et al, 2002). Our results support this idea, with significant positive effects of transformational leadership and QM on knowledge acquisition, dissemination, and responsiveness.…”

“…Our findings extend the view of potential differences among the three dimensions of KM that has been presented in prior research (Darroch, 2003(Darroch, , 2005. Knowledge acquisition and dissemination may have little practical value apart from knowledge responsiveness, which implies a higher systemic maturity level (Hartman et al, 2002;Hsu & Shen, 2005). Our results are the first to provide empirical evidence for the closer proximity to organizational performance of knowledge responsiveness than that of the other two dimensions.…”

“…Several additional studies concluded that transformational leadership leads to KM components such as greater information discovery and exchange, as well as error reduction and improved quality of patient care at the organizational level (Khatri et al, 2007;Robbins & Davidhizar, 2007;Xirasagar et al, 2006). Likewise, because QM programs are exercises in organizational learning and knowledge creation (Choo et al, 2007) and result in cultures of employee support and empowerment, organizations having successfully imple-mented QM initiatives tend to be more successful in adopting and implementing KM practices (Hartman et al, 2002). Therefore, we propose that transformational leadership and QM have an indirect effect on organizational performance through their impacts on KM.…”

“…Although dependent variables in health care management research are most commonly represented by perceptual measures (e.g., Alexander et al, 2007;Caldwell et al, 2008;Goldstein & Schweikhart, 2002;Halbesleben & Rathert, 2008;Hartman et al, 2002;Khatri et al, 2007;Lukas et al, 2007;Savič et al, 2007), some studies have used third-party objective measures (Menachemi et al, 2008;Thouin et al, 2008). Potential sources of objective outcome data were considered for the current study, but they were not publicly available for all U.S. hospitals at the time of this study.…”

“…KM and QM affect organizational performance in independent and complementary ways in principle and practice (Choo, Linderman, & Schroeder, 2007;Hsu & Shen, 2005). In addition, the results of comparative research showed that QM maturity leads to KM maturity and organizational performance, with maturity levels being much lower for health care than those for nonhealth care service organizations (Hartman, Fok, Fok, & Li, 2002).…”