Motivation factors affecting the job attitude of medical doctors and the organizational performance of public hospitals in Warsaw, Poland.
Attitude to work
Management
Motivation
Organizational performance
Performance feedback
Supervision
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Jul 2020
29 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
02
12
2019
accepted:
23
07
2020
entrez:
31
7
2020
pubmed:
31
7
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This paper examines the relationship between selected motivation factors that affect the attitude to work among medical doctors at public hospitals and the organizational performance of hospitals. This study was based on World Health Organization questionnaires designed to estimate motivation factors according to Herzberg's motivation theory and to measure the level of organizational performance of hospitals by using the McKinsey model. A survey was conducted among physicians (n = 249) with either surgical (operative) or nonsurgical (conservative) specialty in 22 departments/units of general public hospitals in Warsaw, Poland. The relationship between the chosen job motivation factors and organizational effectiveness was determined using Spearman's rank correlation. Furthermore, 95% confidence intervals were calculated. The independent samples t-test was used to confirm statistically significant differences between the independent groups. Normality of the data was tested by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The survey revealed that motivation factors related to "quality and style of supervision" have the highest effect on the organizational performance of hospitals (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = 0.490; p < 0.001), whereas "performance feedback" has the lowest effect on organizational performance according to the surveyed healthcare professionals (54% of physicians). The principles of Individual Performance Review should be incorporated into strategies designed to improve the organizational performance of hospitals (with NHS serving as a potential role model) in order to establish specific rules on how to share performance feedback with individual physicians. The present study contributes to literature on human resource management in the healthcare sector and highlights the importance of nonfinancial aspects in improving the organizational performance of hospitals.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This paper examines the relationship between selected motivation factors that affect the attitude to work among medical doctors at public hospitals and the organizational performance of hospitals.
METHODS
METHODS
This study was based on World Health Organization questionnaires designed to estimate motivation factors according to Herzberg's motivation theory and to measure the level of organizational performance of hospitals by using the McKinsey model. A survey was conducted among physicians (n = 249) with either surgical (operative) or nonsurgical (conservative) specialty in 22 departments/units of general public hospitals in Warsaw, Poland. The relationship between the chosen job motivation factors and organizational effectiveness was determined using Spearman's rank correlation. Furthermore, 95% confidence intervals were calculated. The independent samples t-test was used to confirm statistically significant differences between the independent groups. Normality of the data was tested by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The survey revealed that motivation factors related to "quality and style of supervision" have the highest effect on the organizational performance of hospitals (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = 0.490; p < 0.001), whereas "performance feedback" has the lowest effect on organizational performance according to the surveyed healthcare professionals (54% of physicians).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The principles of Individual Performance Review should be incorporated into strategies designed to improve the organizational performance of hospitals (with NHS serving as a potential role model) in order to establish specific rules on how to share performance feedback with individual physicians. The present study contributes to literature on human resource management in the healthcare sector and highlights the importance of nonfinancial aspects in improving the organizational performance of hospitals.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32727454
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05573-z
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05573-z
pmc: PMC7391589
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
701Références
Hum Resour Health. 2007 Feb 26;5:4
pubmed: 17319973
Hum Resour Health. 2006 Mar 07;4:6
pubmed: 16522213
Health Serv Manage Res. 2008 Nov;21(4):211-27
pubmed: 18957399
Radiol Technol. 2008 Nov-Dec;80(2):113-22
pubmed: 19005093
J Health Organ Manag. 2005;19(6):413-30
pubmed: 16375065
Ann Intern Med. 2006 Jan 17;144(2):107-15
pubmed: 16418410
BMJ. 2012 Jul 03;345:e4464
pubmed: 22761095
Postgrad Med J. 2003 May;79(931):289-91
pubmed: 12782777
Harv Bus Rev. 2003 Jan;81(1):87-96
pubmed: 12545925
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jan;27(1):28-36
pubmed: 21773849
Health Policy. 2014 Feb;114(2-3):118-27
pubmed: 24314626
Hum Resour Health. 2006 Aug 29;4:24
pubmed: 16939644
Hum Resour Health. 2003 Apr 14;1(1):1
pubmed: 12904254
JAMA. 2001 May 23-30;285(20):2604-11
pubmed: 11368734
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 21;14:566
pubmed: 25412841
Hum Resour Health. 2010 Nov 16;8:26
pubmed: 21080954
BMC Health Serv Res. 2005 Jun 08;5:44
pubmed: 15943859
Med Care. 2006 Mar;44(3):234-42
pubmed: 16501394
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2009 Jan;394(1):179-83
pubmed: 18575884
Acad Med. 2012 Jan;87(1):91-7
pubmed: 22104056
Health Technol Assess. 2010 Oct;14(51):1-334, iv
pubmed: 21050585
J Gen Intern Med. 2000 Jul;15(7):441-50
pubmed: 10940129
Am J Med Qual. 1999 Jan-Feb;14(1):64-9
pubmed: 10446665
Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2005 Jul-Sep;24(3):284-92
pubmed: 16131939
Prehosp Disaster Med. 1999 Oct-Dec;14(4):236-9
pubmed: 10915409
BMC Health Serv Res. 2002 Mar 25;2(1):6
pubmed: 11914162
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Dec 04;8:247
pubmed: 19055827
Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2005 Apr-Jun;24(2):165-76
pubmed: 15923929
Qual Health Care. 2001 Mar;10(1):40-8
pubmed: 11239143
Radiol Technol. 2009 Mar-Apr;80(4):297-308
pubmed: 19293118
J Hosp Med. 2009 Nov;4(9):560-8
pubmed: 20013859
Int J Public Health. 2007;52(1):54-9
pubmed: 17966819
Mil Med. 2009 Sep;174(9):929-35
pubmed: 19780367
Med Care Res Rev. 2014 Feb;71(1):21-42
pubmed: 24132582
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Sep 16;9:166
pubmed: 19758454
Soc Sci Med. 2002 Apr;54(8):1255-66
pubmed: 11989961
Gesundheitswesen. 2008 Aug-Sep;70(8-9):519-24
pubmed: 18785097
Hum Resour Health. 2016 Dec 7;14(1):75
pubmed: 27923402
Clin Med (Lond). 2013 Feb;13(1):19-23
pubmed: 23472488
Milbank Q. 2001;79(2):281-315
pubmed: 11439467
Hum Resour Health. 2015 Oct 29;13:83
pubmed: 26510794
Health Serv Res. 1995 Jun;30(2):377-401
pubmed: 7782222
Hum Resour Health. 2003 Nov 5;1(1):10
pubmed: 14613527
Med J Armed Forces India. 2004 Oct;60(4):329-32
pubmed: 27407669
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2006 Nov;19(3):385-7
pubmed: 17178522
Soc Sci Med. 2001 Jan;52(2):203-13
pubmed: 11144776
Health Serv Manage. 1989 Dec;85(6):252-5
pubmed: 10304228
J Psychol. 2001 Mar;135(2):226-36
pubmed: 11403344
J Fam Pract. 2002 Mar;51(3):223-8
pubmed: 11978232
J Nurs Manag. 2007 Nov;15(8):811-6
pubmed: 17944606
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2005 Mar 11;130(10):508-13
pubmed: 15744642
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Sep 15;9:164
pubmed: 19754968