Middle managers' attitudes toward employee assistance programs in the corporate setting

Several studies have shown that successful Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) have strong management endorsement. Strong management endorsement is defined as positive support in utilizing EAP services for themselves and their employees. This study focuses solely on middle management as opposed to upper or general management support. The study further examines success or lack of success of an EAP by the utilization rate defined as the number of employees over a year period who access EAP services.^ A analytical cross-sectional design was used to compare and observe differences between two groups of middle managers (utilizers and nonutilizers). Middle manager data was collected through a mail questionnaire. The study focused on identifying predictors that influence middle managers' utilization rate specifically: attitude toward EAPs, EAP knowledge level, attitude toward mental health professionals, age, gender, years worked as a middle manager, education level, training, and other possible predictors of utilization. The overall hypothesis states middle manager utilizers of EAP services have more positive attitudes and a better understanding of their EAP than middle management nonutilizers.^ As predicted, nonparametric bivariate results showed significant differences between the two groups. Middle managers in the utilization group (n = 473) tended to show more positive attitudes toward their EAP and mental health professionals and demonstrated greater EAP knowledge compared to the nonutilization group (n = 154). These findings support past studies on variables that influence EAP utilization rates.^ Further variables found to influence middle management utilization were identified by multivariate logistic regression results. These variable were gender (female supervisors), educational levels of employees supervised (employees with lower levels of education), number of employees supervised (greater the number supervised, more likely to utilize), managerial EAP training (trained supervisors) and awareness that problems do influence an employee's productivity.^ These findings strengthen the assertion that middle management's attitudes, as well as other variables may influence utilization. Study findings add new information about important variables specifically influencing middle management who utilize EAPs. An understanding of these variables is essential in developing competent EAP program training and orientation programs for middle managers. ^

For-profit business safety interventions: A systematic, descriptive review of the literature

The purpose of this research was to determine if principles from organizational theory could be used as a framework to compare and contrast safety interventions developed by for-profit industry for the time period 1986–1996. A literature search of electronic databases and manual search of journals and local university libraries' book stacks was conducted for safety interventions developed by for-profit businesses. To maintain a constant regulatory environment, the business sectors of nuclear power, aviation and non-profits were excluded. Safety intervention evaluations were screened for scientific merit. Leavitt's model from organization theory was updated to include safety climate and renamed the Updated Leavitt's Model. In all, 8000 safety citations were retrieved, 525 met the inclusion criteria, 255 met the organizational safety intervention criteria, and 50 met the scientific merit criteria. Most came from non-public health journals. These 50 were categorized by the Updated Leavitt's Model according to where within the organizational structure the intervention took place. Evidence tables were constructed for descriptive comparison. The interventions clustered in the areas of social structure, safety climate, the interaction between social structure and participants, and the interaction between technology and participants. No interventions were found in the interactions between social structure and technology, goals and technology, or participants and goals. Despite the scientific merit criteria, many still had significant study design weaknesses. Five interventions tested for statistical significance but none of the interventions commented on the power of their study. Empiric studies based on safety climate theorems had the most rigorous designs. There was an attempt in these studies to address randomization amongst subjects to avoid bias. This work highlights the utility of using the Updated Leavitt's Model, a model from organizational theory, as a framework when comparing safety interventions. This work also highlights the need for better study design of future trials of safety interventions. ^

Future pandemic influenza control (FPIC) related strategic management plan based on the 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza review of health policy decisions, their practice and implications

This cross-sectional study is based on the qualitative and quantitative research design to review health policy decisions, their practice and implications during 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic in the United States and globally. The “Future Pandemic Influenza Control (FPIC) related Strategic Management Plan” was developed based on the incorporation of the “National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza (2005)” for the United States from the U.S. Homeland Security Council and “The Canadian Pandemic Influenza Plan for the Health Sector (2006)” from the Canadian Pandemic Influenza Committee for use by the public health agencies in the United States as well as globally. The “global influenza experts’ survey” was primarily designed and administered via email through the “Survey Monkey” system to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic experts as the study respondents. The effectiveness of this plan was confirmed and the approach of the study questionnaire was validated to be convenient and the excellent quality of the questions provided an efficient opportunity to the study respondents to evaluate the effectiveness of predefined strategies/interventions for future pandemic influenza control.^ The quantitative analysis of the responses to the Likert-scale based questions in the survey about predefined strategies/interventions, addressing five strategic issues to control future pandemic influenza. The effectiveness of strategies defined as pertinent interventions in this plan was evaluated by targeting five strategic issues regarding pandemic influenza control. For the first strategic issue pertaining influenza prevention and pre pandemic planning; the confirmed effectiveness (agreement) for strategy (1a) 87.5%, strategy (1b) 91.7% and strategy (1c) 83.3%. The assessment of the priority level for strategies to address the strategic issue no. (1); (1b (High Priority) > 1a (Medium Priority) > 1c (Low Priority) based on the available resources of the developing and developed countries. For the second Strategic Issue encompassing the preparedness and communication regarding pandemic influenza control; the confirmed effectiveness (agreement) for the strategy (2a) 95.6%, strategy (2b) 82.6%, strategy (2c) 91.3% and Strategy (2d) 87.0%. The assessment of the priority level for these strategies to address the strategic issue no. (2); (2a (highest priority) > 2c (high priority) >2d (medium priority) > 2b (low priority). For the third strategic issue encompassing the surveillance and detection of pandemic influenza; the confirmed effectiveness (agreement) for the strategy (3a) 90.9% and strategy (3b) 77.3%. The assessment of the priority level for theses strategies to address the strategic Issue No. (3) (3a (high priority) > 3b (medium/low priority). For the fourth strategic issue pertaining the response and containment of pandemic influenza; the confirmed effectiveness (agreement) for the strategy (4a) 63.6%, strategy (4b) 81.8%, strategy (4c) 86.3%, and strategy (4d) 86.4%. The assessment of the priority level for these strategies to address the strategic issue no. (4); (4d (highest priority) > 4c (high priority) > 4b (medium priority) > 4a (low priority). The fifth strategic issue about recovery from influenza and post pandemic planning; the confirmed effectiveness (agreement) for the strategy (5a) 68.2%, strategy (5b) 36.3% and strategy (5c) 40.9%. The assessment of the priority level for strategies to address the strategic issue no. (5); (5a (high priority) > 5c (medium priority) > 5b (low priority).^ The qualitative analysis of responses to the open-ended questions in the study questionnaire was performed by means of thematic content analysis. The following recurrent or common “themes” were determined for the future implementation of various predefined strategies to address five strategic issues from the “FPIC related Strategic Management Plan” to control future influenza pandemics. (1) Pre Pandemic Influenza Prevention, (2) Seasonal Influenza Control, (3) Cost Effectiveness of Non Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPI), (4) Raising Global Public Awareness, (5) Global Influenza Vaccination Campaigns, (6)Priority for High Risk Population, (7) Prompt Accessibility and Distribution of Influenza Vaccines and Antiviral Drugs, (8) The Vital Role of Private Sector, (9) School Based Influenza Containment, (10) Efficient Global Risk Communication, (11) Global Research Collaboration, (12) The Critical Role of Global Public Health Organizations, (13) Global Syndromic Surveillance and Surge Capacity and (14) Post Pandemic Recovery and Lessons Learned. The future implementation of these strategies with confirmed effectiveness to primarily “reduce the overall response time’ in the process of ‘early detection’, ‘strategies (interventions) formulation’ and their ‘implementation’ to eventually ensure the following health outcomes: (a) reduced influenza transmission, (b) prompt and effective influenza treatment and control, (c) reduced influenza related morbidity and mortality.^

Academic medical centers: A framework for strategic repositioning

This study sought to understand the elements affecting the success or failure of strategic repositioning efforts by academic medical centers (AMC). The research question was: What specific elements in the process appear to be most important in determining the success or failure of an AMC.s strategic repositioning? Where success is based on the longterm sustainability of the new position.^ "An organization's strategic position is its perceptual location relative to others" (Gershon, 2003). Hence, strategic repositioning represents a shift from one strategic position within an environment to another (H. Mintzberg, 1987a). A deteriorating value proposition coupled with an unsustainable national health care financing system is forcing AMCs to change their strategic position. Where the value proposition is defined as the health outcome per dollar spent. ^ AMCs are of foundational importance to our health care system. They educate our new physicians, generate significant scientific breakthroughs, and care for our most difficult patients. Yet, their strategic, financial and business acumen leaves them particularly vulnerable in a changing environment. ^ After a literature review revealed limited writing on this subject, the research question was addressed using three separate but parallel exploratory case study inquiries of AMCs that recently underwent a strategic repositioning. Participating in the case studies were the Baylor College of Medicine, the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, and the University of Texas Medical Branch.^ Each case study consisted of two major research segments; a thorough documentation review followed by semi-structured interviews of selected members of their governance board, executive and faculty leadership teams. While each case study.s circumstances varied, their response to the research question, as extracted through thematic coding and analysis of the interviews, had a high degree of commonality.^ The results identified managing the strategic risk surrounding the repositioning and leadership accountability as the two foundational elements of success or failure. Metrics and communication were important process elements. They both play a major role in managing the strategic repositioning risk communication loop. Sustainability, the final element, was the outcome sought.^ Factors leading to strategic repositioning included both internal and external pressures and were primarily financial or mission based. Timing was an important consideration as was the selection of the strategic repositioning endpoint.^ In conclusion, a framework for the strategic repositioning of AMCs was offered that integrates the findings of this study; the elements of success, the factors leading to strategic repositioning, and the risk communication loop. ^