MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760356137

An integrated model of organizational culture and climate : a case study in obstetrics practice in Ontario

2017· dissertation· en· W2760356137 on OpenAlex
Manoj S. Patankar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWhite Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational cultureIntervention (counseling)Medical educationCorporationSample (material)PsychologyMedicineEngineeringNursingPublic relationsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to determine whether a training intervention would be sufficient to produce a cultural change. A comprehensive review of literature on culture and climate indicated that these separately studied constructs could be integrated; thus, an integrated model of culture and climate, and the associated theory, was developed. Three studies were conducted within the obstetrics practice in Ontario, Canada. The specific training intervention used in this study was the MOREOB program (Managing Obstetric Risks Efficiently), which was a proprietary program developed by the Salus Global Corporation, Canada. This program sought to improve safety culture in the field of obstetrics through a strategic approach to knowledge-building and team-training. Over the past decade, more than 300 hospitals across Canada have implemented this program. However, the impact of this program on the culture of respective obstetrics units had not been evaluated. The sample for this research consisted of 68 hospitals from Ontario that had implemented the MORE-OB program. 
\n
\nOverall, this study used a mixed-methods approach, consisting of both quantitative and qualitative analyses, and explored five research questions and two hypotheses. The study was structured in terms of three sub-studies: Study#1 focused on quantitative assessment of knowledge gained through the training intervention, changes in clinical outcomes, and changes in the patient safety climate; Study #2 focused on qualitative assessment aimed at analyzing interview narratives and artifacts to develop a deeper understanding of how various external influences as well as internal factors and the MORE-OB training may have shaped the organizational culture at the subject hospitals. Study #3 took a longitudinal approach and presented an integrated analysis of culture and climate at two subject hospitals.
\n 
\nUltimately, the three studies arrived at the following conclusions:
\n1.\tContemporary environmental factors such as economics, geo-social conditions, legal requirements, and professional coalitions played a vital role in influencing organizational values as well operationalizing them. By asking the study participants how external environmental factors might have influenced their organizational culture, the researcher was able to map the role played by the changing external conditions in shifting the participants’ unquestioned assumptions. 
\n 
\n2.\tLeadership’s role in shaping organizational culture was not limited to imprinting of his/her personal values on the organization. First, key influencers outside the organization raised awareness about critical issues, questioned the norms, and presented ideas and test-cases about best practices that could be used to solve the issues. Next, formal leaders within the organization interpreted these external signals in the context of local conditions and engaged internal mechanisms to revise or reinforce corresponding organizational values. Internal key influencers, on the other hand, took the signal from their formal leaders and developed group-level standards of practice, enforced those standards, and served as role models.
\n
\n3.\tThree levels of shared experiences were noted: (a) experiences resulting from external influences (e.g., the experiences resulting from placing one subject hospital under supervisory control); (b) experiences resulting from internal implementation mechanism (e.g., the use of the Lean methodology across one of the subject hospitals); and (c) experiences resulting from the MOREOB program as a training intervention aimed at improving the patient safety culture in obstetrics. 
\n
\n4.\tA 2x2 matrix of internal versus external and formal versus informal feedback mechanisms was noted. External mechanisms, whether formal or informal, were aligned with external influence factors. For example, overall transparency regarding every hospital’s clinical performance provided means to compare hospital performance across peers and enabled patients to choose their care providers based on quality of care metrics. Since patient volume was linked with financial health of the hospital, the benchmarked performance measures received significant attention from senior management. Thus, the study of feedback mechanisms revealed how such mechanisms could work in concert with external factors and have substantial impact on the organizational culture.
\n
\n5.\tThere was a positive influence of training on participants’ knowledge, clinical outcomes, and safety climate factors. Additionally, the training was aligned with shared organizational values. However, it was evident from the low-to-moderate relationship between improvements in clinical knowledge (the focus of the training intervention) and the safety climate improvements that training alone was not sufficient to cause a climatic or cultural change. Results of the qualitative analysis were helpful in understanding the influence of MOREOB training on shared values, practices, leadership commitment, and use of feedback mechanisms. Thus, while training may improve the organizational climate, its impact on culture is dependent on its alignment with shared organizational values, leadership commitment, and appropriate use of feedback mechanisms (including alignment of incentives). 
\n
\nThe emergent model of culture and climate was revised to better represent the various mechanisms that influence organizational culture and climate. As a macro-level integrative model, it presents an alternate perspective compared to other models that generally tend to focus on specific elements like values or leadership. Future studies should consider different domains and different planned interventions in order to test the transferability of the proposed integrated model of culture and climate. 
\n

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it