• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Healthcare Administration >Issues in the Application of HKM to Thai Private Hospitals: The View from the Top
【24h】

Issues in the Application of HKM to Thai Private Hospitals: The View from the Top

机译：HKM应用于泰国私立医院的问题：顶视图

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The purpose of this paper is to understand the perspectives of the application of Health related Knowledge Management (HKM) at hospitals in Bangkok in a qualitatively-oriented research inquiry. The paper examines the scope, reflections, attitudes of management to the development and application of HKM to a select number of Thai private hospitals. The paper develops a model that attempts to conceptualise the findings from a diverse range of qualitative personnel opinion into an engaged framework. Outcomes from this inquiry suggests that managers know clearly that HKM may be a logical factor in the development of business attributes in these hospitals and explores the derived themes of namely five (5) main themes, Organizational Priorities Issues; Change Management Issues; Performance Measurement Issues; Staff Priority Issues; and Communication Issues. This study also provides insights into the application and development of HKM in Thai private hospitals. Introduction KM has been applied to a very broad spectrum of organisational activities designed to manage, exchange and create or enhance knowledge assets within an organization (Haggie and Kingston, 2003; Mack, Ravin and Byrd 2001; O’Leary, 1998) which replicates a complex system of discursive and non-discursive practices (Giddens, 1984). Strategic developments in healthcare knowledge management (HKM) have often centered on institutional efficiency issues and given little attention to healthcare givers personal and organisational knowledge management fundamentally introduces insight into intellectual capital management (Jafari et al., 2009). This is where it is often refined from information and data and, therefore, it is seen as more valuable for management and other decision-makers (Thierauf, 2001).Researchers have indicated that perhaps as much as 70% have not been successful in implementing established change strategies and goals (Charan and Colvin, 1999). Management leadership style (Parry and Proctor-Thomson, 2003) however, may have significant effects on HKM organizational performance implementation. The major goal of HKM appears to be to manage, record, and disseminate the accumulation of knowledge, and valuable expertise from throughout the hospital over time (Wiig 1994) - often using technology. This means that this must be top management supported (James, 2005) and stimulated in order to lead the knowledge-creating activities of individuals in the organisation (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995). Valued organisational knowledge (Davenport and Prusak, 2000) should be considered a valuable strategic asset, and knowledge-sharing between employees appears to be distributed in formal and informal networks of relationships (Remko and Buijsroggee 2006). Incorporating knowledge-sharing within the organizational culture is perhaps the most important factor for successful HKM system implementation (O’Donovan, Heavin and Butler, 2006); addressing the ubiquitous knowledge gaps inherent within a healthcare system (Bali and Dwivedi, 2006).This paper takes the view that strategic HKM focuses more on the behaviour change of personnel and consequent policies rather than just be technologically focused and driven. In essence, it is seen as effectively driven my management through processes and optimized through technology use to improve the quality, efficiency, competitiveness (Powers, 2004) and efficacy of the hospital healthcare delivery system (Montani and Bellazzi, 2002) through beneficial (personal knowledge) network co-operation (Johanson and Mattsson, 1987). Knowledge flow (Gupta and Govindarajan, 2000) appears to focus on as the transfer of either expertise or external work data of personal or material strategic essence and value. However, the flow of knowledge is difficult to define explicitly (Mu, Peng, and Love, 2008). Benefits of applying this include streamlining important progress, developing whole-facility innovation, and increasing overall competitiveness (Stefl, 2002). This b
机译：本文旨在以定性为导向的研究调查，了解在曼谷的医院中应用健康相关知识管理（HKM）的观点。本文研究了在泰国多家私人医院中，HKM的发展和应用的管理范围，思考，态度。本文开发了一个模型，该模型试图将各种定性人员意见的发现概念化为参与框架。调查的结果表明，管理人员清楚地知道，金管局可能是这些医院业务属性发展的逻辑因素，并探讨了衍生的主题，即五（5）个主要主题：组织优先事项;变更管理问题;绩效评估问题;员工优先事项;和沟通问题。这项研究还提供了HKM在泰国私立医院中的应用和发展的见解。简介知识管理已应用于组织管理，交换和创建或增强组织中的知识资产的各种组织活动（Haggie和Kingston，2003年; Mack，Ravin和Byrd，2001年; O'Leary，1998年），它复制了话语和非话语实践的复杂系统（吉登斯，1984年）。医疗保健知识管理（HKM）的战略发展通常集中在机构效率问题上，而很少关注医疗保健提供者的个人和组织知识管理从根本上引入了对智力资本管理的见识（Jafari et al。，2009）。这是经常从信息和数据中提炼出来的地方，因此，对于管理人员和其他决策者来说，它更有价值（Thierauf，2001年）。研究人员表示，也许有多达70％的方法未能成功实施制定变革策略和目标（Charan和Colvin，1999年）。然而，管理领导风格（Parry和Proctor-Thomson，2003）可能会对HKM组织绩效的实施产生重大影响。金管局的主要目标似乎是经常使用技术来管理，记录和传播整个医院的知识和宝贵的专业知识（Wiig 1994）。这意味着必须领导高层管理人员的支持（James，2005）并加以激励，以便领导组织中个人的知识创造活动（Nonaka和Takeuchi 1995）。有价值的组织知识（Davenport和Prusak，2000）应被视为宝贵的战略资产，员工之间的知识共享似乎分布在正式和非正式的关系网络中（Remko和Buijsroggee 2006）。在组织文化中融入知识共享可能是成功实施HKM系统的最重要因素（O’Donovan，Heavin和Butler，2006）;解决医疗系统内在普遍存在的知识鸿沟（Bali and Dwivedi，2006）。本文认为，战略性HKM更加侧重于人员的行为变化和随之而来的政策，而不仅仅是技术上的关注和驱动。从本质上讲，它被视为通过流程有效地驱动了我的管理，并通过技术使用来优化，以通过受益（个人）来提高医院医疗服务体系的质量，效率，竞争力（Powers，2004）和功效（Montani and Bellazzi，2002）。知识）网络合作（Johanson和Mattsson，1987）。知识流（Gupta和Govindarajan，2000年）似乎专注于个人或物质战略本质和价值的专业知识或外部工作数据的转移。但是，知识流很难明确定义（Mu，Peng和Love，2008年）。应用此方法的好处包括简化重要的进展，开发整个设施的创新以及提高整体竞争力（Stefl，2002）。这个b

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号