The case describes how the management of Jonkoping county council found in Sweden manages the healthcare system under its jurisdiction. The county is served by a population of 9000 employees. It has three healthcare facilities under its jurisdiction.
The case also describes the population situation on the ground and the demands that the available healthcare facilities faced. The management of the county came up with a plan that would enable the county health facilities to offer quality healthcare services in a sustainable way. The case describes how the county management formulated strategic management ideas, including how the ideas were implemented.
The focus of the county authority was to deliver quality healthcare services to its population without increasing the cost of the services that are born by the people. The management aimed at providing quality health care as a way of reducing mortality rate in county. The case narrates the steps the management of the county undertook to achieve the objectives.
Key Components of the Case
The case is divided into several intertwined components that make up the story. The first component describes the Jonkoping county community by providing a background of the health sector situation. The second component describes the management approach and decisions that were envisaged by the county authority. The implementation of successful ideas requires the inclusion and cooperation of all players (Maccoby et al., 2015). This strategy enables the idea to be pursued as a team effort with one goal in mind. The case enumerates the achievements made by the county after following the management approach explained therein.
Health Care Delivery Model
The healthcare delivery model explained in the case is primary healthcare partnership program. The model is achieved through a systems approach. The county authority, the hospital management, and other players outside the county have an array of partnership programs. The management emphasizes partnership within the healthcare facilities, partnership within the county. It also encourages partnership with others in Sweden as a country and partnership outside the country. The program entails intertwined professional knowledge, improvement knowledge, and systems thinking.
Partnering meant that the county authority, which is the owner of the facilities works hand in hand with the hospital management. The goal was to provide services cost effectively. Both groups provided professional knowledge to the initiative. Improvement of knowledge was done through a partnership with Qulturum. Qulturum is a center for learning and innovation. By consolidating the different systems through partnerships, the county managed to offer services beyond its capacity by tapping other sources outside its jurisdiction.
The Structure of the Organization
The organization structure in this case is a hybrid model. The hybrid model allows societal organizations to achieve their social obligations through commercial business models (Santos, Pache, & Bilkholz, 2015). The county and the hospitals were able to marry their purposes. They also had a working structure that could allow them to achieve their common objective. The county authority employed a business model on a social entity. Its goal was to provide quality services in a cost effective manner.
The organizational structure portrays different entities that have been put together but still running independently. On the other hand, the different organizations or collaborations have achieved the same goal without necessarily breaking down their systems. The county authority owns the health facilities, but it has left the management of the same to the hospital administrators. The hospital administrators align their objectives to those meted out by the county without necessarily breaking down their systems. This plan brings out a flexible hybrid model that achieves the intended results.
The communication pattern portrayed in the case is the wheel. The wheel has been described as a model for teams that are centrally managed (Espinosa, Nan, & Carmel, 2015). In the case of Jonkoping County, most decisions are centrally conceived by the county authority. The county authority is the main manager in the scene. The decisions are then communicated to the county health facilities, which plan and implement them according to their mandate. The hospitals have a single individual who coordinates their activities with the outside world, thus enhancing the pattern.
When the county wished to communicate to health facilities, Goran Henriks was used as the main conduit for information to the three health facilities. Information coming from the county authority could be communicated to the facilities by Henriks. The facilities could give feedback to county authority through him. Information coming from outside the county would still go through him. This form of centralized information acquisition and dissemination is the key to achieving standardization of practice within organizations.
Negotiation can be described as a communication process between one or more groups. It is aimed at reaching a compromise that can solve a certain problem. The mode of negotiation adopted by parties depends on the issues on the table and the amounts of rights being demanded by a certain group. In the case of Jonkoping, the negotiation expected should be mutual because the parties involved are one entity. The process involves negotiating between systems in an organization. Principled negotiation strategy fits the above description because it allows the parties involved to forge a meaningful working relationship (Lens, 2014).
Performance following the Change Initiative
The organization’s performance gained from changes initiated by the management. The county was able to provide the best services to its residents to become a point of reference to the central government. Jonkoping health facilities became more efficient in the provision of health services to its residents at a low cost than expected. The changes allowed the county and its health facilities to collaborate with other institutions both inside and outside the country to share knowledge. By adopting good management practices, the county was able to develop a functional system. The system ensured that services were provided to the satisfaction of clients at an affordable cost.
Laws and Regulations
Health management in Sweden lies in the hands of the local authorities known as the county governments. These authorities have been given the mandate to provide the services by the national government. The national government provides the framework and policy. Health issues in Sweden are governed under the Health and Medical Services Act. The Act provides the main principles and a policy framework (Fredriksson, Blomqvist, & Winblad, 2012). Beneath this law, it is the duty of the county authorities to provide medical services to the people according to need.
The county authorities levy taxes on the people. The taxes act as the source of the money meant for medical services. The Swedish government and many other governments under the European Union share the same standards with regards to healthcare management and regulation.
The management of Jonkoping County has become a reference point for counties in Sweden. It has also attracted the attention of health facilities all over the world. The success has been achieved through proactive thinking and management. It has enabled it to produce the best services that are now a studying point. The county was aiming at providing quality services. However, it was aware that such a move would require it to raise more revenue, which could be punitive to the people. Therefore, the county designed cost-effective management policies that allowed it and the hospitals to achieve the desired results.
Espinosa, A., Nan, N., & Carmel, E. (2015). Temporal Distance, Communication Patterns, and Task Performance in Teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(1), 151-191.
Fredriksson, M., Blomqvist, P., & Winblad, U. (2012). Conflict and Compliance in Swedish Health Care Governance: Soft Law in the Shadow of Hierachy. Scandinavian Political Studies, 35(1), 48-70.
Lens, V. (2014). Principled Negotiation: A New Tool for Case Advocacy. Social Work, 49(3), 506–516.
Maccoby, M., Norman, L., Norman, C. J., & Margolies, R. (2013). Transforming Health Care Leadership: A Systems Guide to Improve Patient Care, Decrease Costs, and Improve Population Health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.
Santos, F., Pache, A., & Birkholz, C. (2015). Making Hybrids Work: Aligning Business Models and Organizational Design for Social Enterprises. California Management Review, 57(3), 36-58.