Discourses of middle managers' cross-boundary collaboration in health and social care

IF 0.9 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Integrated Care Pub Date : 2022-03-04 DOI:10.1108/jica-10-2021-0054
Anneli Hujala, H. Taskinen, Sanna Laulainen, Charlotte Klinga, S. Schruijer
{"title":"Discourses of middle managers' cross-boundary collaboration in health and social care","authors":"Anneli Hujala, H. Taskinen, Sanna Laulainen, Charlotte Klinga, S. Schruijer","doi":"10.1108/jica-10-2021-0054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeIn the implementation of integrated care, the role of managers is important and their mutual collaboration should be addressed more visibly. The purpose of this study was to investigate how cross-boundary collaboration is constructed in the discourse of middle-level managers in health and social care.Design/methodology/approachThe study was based on a discursive approach. Group discussions with three groups of Finnish middle managers (n = 39) were analyzed using discourse analysis.FindingsFive ways of talking about cross-boundary collaboration were identified, labeled “ideal”, “structure”, “defence”, “money” and “support” discourses. In the ideal discourse, cross-boundary collaboration appeared as a “good thing” and is self-evident. Structural discourse defined managers as passive actors in self-sustaining entities. Defensive discourse highlighted the problems of cross-boundary collaboration and the hierarchy within the health and social sectors. Financial discourse constituted the ultimate obstacle to successful cross-boundary collaboration, and both strengthened and explained defensive discourse. Supportive discourse portrayed other managers as partners and as an important resource.Research limitations/implicationsCross-boundary collaboration can be experienced as a resource, helping managers cope with their workload. However, identification of and continuous attention to challenges at macro, meso and micro levels of integrated care is crucial for successful collaboration. Thus, critical discussion of collaboration needs to be given space.Originality/valueThe study design and discursive approach highlights the power of language and give voice to middle managers who are key actors when implementing integrated care.","PeriodicalId":51837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrated Care","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrated Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jica-10-2021-0054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeIn the implementation of integrated care, the role of managers is important and their mutual collaboration should be addressed more visibly. The purpose of this study was to investigate how cross-boundary collaboration is constructed in the discourse of middle-level managers in health and social care.Design/methodology/approachThe study was based on a discursive approach. Group discussions with three groups of Finnish middle managers (n = 39) were analyzed using discourse analysis.FindingsFive ways of talking about cross-boundary collaboration were identified, labeled “ideal”, “structure”, “defence”, “money” and “support” discourses. In the ideal discourse, cross-boundary collaboration appeared as a “good thing” and is self-evident. Structural discourse defined managers as passive actors in self-sustaining entities. Defensive discourse highlighted the problems of cross-boundary collaboration and the hierarchy within the health and social sectors. Financial discourse constituted the ultimate obstacle to successful cross-boundary collaboration, and both strengthened and explained defensive discourse. Supportive discourse portrayed other managers as partners and as an important resource.Research limitations/implicationsCross-boundary collaboration can be experienced as a resource, helping managers cope with their workload. However, identification of and continuous attention to challenges at macro, meso and micro levels of integrated care is crucial for successful collaboration. Thus, critical discussion of collaboration needs to be given space.Originality/valueThe study design and discursive approach highlights the power of language and give voice to middle managers who are key actors when implementing integrated care.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中层管理人员在健康与社会关怀领域的跨界合作话语
目的在实施综合护理过程中,管理者的作用十分重要,管理者之间的相互协作应更加明显。摘要本研究旨在探讨卫生与社会关怀中层管理人员的话语中,跨界合作是如何建构的。设计/方法/方法这项研究是以论述方法为基础的。使用话语分析对三组芬兰中层管理人员(n = 39)的小组讨论进行分析。研究结果指出了五种谈论跨界合作的方式,分别是“理想”、“结构”、“防御”、“金钱”和“支持”话语。在理想话语中,跨界合作作为一件“好事”出现,不言自明。结构话语将管理者定义为自我维持实体中的被动行动者。防御性的论述强调了跨界合作的问题以及卫生和社会部门内部的等级制度。金融话语是成功跨界合作的终极障碍,它既强化了防御性话语,又解释了防御性话语。支持性话语将其他管理者描述为合作伙伴和重要资源。研究限制/启示跨界合作可以作为一种资源来体验,帮助管理者处理他们的工作量。然而,确定并持续关注宏观、中观和微观层面的综合护理挑战对成功合作至关重要。因此,需要给予协作的批判性讨论空间。原创性/价值研究设计和话语方法强调了语言的力量,并赋予中层管理人员发言权,他们是实施综合护理的关键角色。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Integrated Care
Journal of Integrated Care HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Are community health agents the link to integrating care? Lesson from Brazil Full Engagement with the NHS in an integrated age: reflections on past endeavours (the Wanless Report) and current challenges (the anti-vaxxer movement) Tackling health inequalities through integrated care in English police custodies: an inclusion perspective and model of care Integrated child mental health care provision in Pakistan: End-user and provider perspectives Health care model for people living in nursing homes based on integrated care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1