Comparing and Contrasting Stakeholders’ Visions in Healthcare

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Visions
Areas of Conflict
Conflicts Through the Prism of the Healthcare Delivery System
Conclusion
Reference List

Introduction

There are currently a variety of signs indicating that the contemporary healthcare system is becoming increasingly more expensive. The costs that the federal budget suffers because of the need to meet the improved quality criteria. As a result, the very concept of value is changing its nature in the context of contemporary healthcare, with a gradual shift from a patient-oriented philosophy to the concept of addressing the current societal needs (Lehoux, Daudelin, Williams-Jones, Denis, & Longo, 2014). Therefore, the society, in general, can be viewed as one of the current stakeholders in healthcare. Consequently, the vision thereof incorporates those of patients, healthcare service members, entrepreneurs, providers, manufacturers, etc. Seeing that each of the stakeholders mentioned above pursues their own unique set of goals, a range of conflicts may emerge in the process of meeting these needs. Although the range of viewpoints that one needs to embrace in order to devise a specific solution is truly ample, there is a strong need to adopt the concept of sustainability and stakeholder satisfaction in the design of the healthcare system so that every participant of the healthcare supply chain should feel satisfied and secure in the identified environment.

Visions

At present, patients, employers, providers, payers, and manufacturers can be identified among the primary stakeholders, whose needs must be taken into account when devising the strategy that will help address the emergent conflicts. When determining the viewpoints of patients, one must bear in mind that, though not being monolithic, the patients’ community is still focused mainly on a single goal, which is recovering without spending an excruciatingly large amount of money. However, one must admit that, on a number of occasions, the patients’ vision is more complex than merely locating the services of an appropriate price-quality correlation. For instance, a range of people refuse to accept the fact that the services that they have chosen are of poor quality even when there is strong evidence of the fact. In addition, a range of patients are very suspicious about the possibility of a hidden cost agenda in the prescription of medication. Last but definitely not least, the issue of privacy and security in the wake of the IT tools usage makes patients agitated and concerned about their wellbeing. As far as the employers are concerned, the rise in the number of defects and deficiencies that the contemporary healthcare industry is filled with needs to be brought up as the primary source of concern. The phenomenon can be explained by the imbalance between the current focus of care and the financial support that most facilities receive. The providers, in their turn, aim at retaining sustainability in the context of the entrepreneurship. As a result, the tools that permit a significant reduction in costs are used actively. Unfortunately, the subsequent drop in quality levels can be viewed as a side effect of the identified programs (Mauro et al., 2014).

Areas of Conflict

As seen from the observations provided above, the correlation between the quality of the services and the amount of the expenses taken to deliver the services in question to the target audience can be interpreted as the root cause of the current problems. Apart from the economic aspect of the issue, the ethical aspects of the choices made by the stakeholders need to be brought up. For instance, there is an obvious necessity for nursing and healthcare facilities to allocate the available resources, which are not quite numerous, in the manner that will help maintain sustainability in the organization. Therefore, some of the tools that will help address the needs of patients, such as the incorporation of the latest IT devices and high-quality equipment, may be postponed until other issues are resolved. The identified steps, in their turn, are likely to cause the dissatisfaction of patients.

Similarly, the providers expect that the facilities should return impressive revenues. The outcome mentioned above, in its turn, is unlikely unless a cost-efficient framework is introduced. The framework will require the acquisition of new equipment and tools, thus, causing a conflict between the providers and the healthcare facility members.

The manufacturers, in their turn, also have the demands that may cause a conflict with other stakeholders. For instance, the fact that manufacturers consider the needs of patients as the primary focus needs to be brought up. While the vision in question seemingly aligns with the one of healthcare facilities’ leaders, it also points to the necessity to invest in the R&D processes greatly. Differently out, the stakeholders are interested in the development of new types of treatment, new medicine, innovative approaches and therapies, etc. As a result, the cost of the products increases significantly, posing a range of obstacles to patients, payers, and providers (Yong, Olsen, & McGinnis, 2011).

Conflicts Through the Prism of the Healthcare Delivery System

When considering the conflicts mentioned above in the context of the healthcare delivery system (HDS), one must admit that the needs of all stakeholders are crucial as each of them determines the proper functioning of the system. Therefore, it is imperative that the principles of sustainability as the foundation for meeting the needs of the parties involved should be promoted. Specifically, the current approach toward financial resources allocation must be revisited so that a more sensible framework should be designed (Bravi et al., 2012).

Specifically, the elements of the current HDS labeled as the organizational ones (particularly, the infrastructure, the resources, etc.) should be viewed as the subject of further changes. It is necessary to alter the present-day Supply Chain Management approach by introducing it to the information management tools that will increase the velocity of services provision (Lambooij & Hummel, 2013).

Similarly, the environment in which the healthcare system stakeholders operate nowadays must be altered slightly. For example, the issues related to the regulation, the market, and the policies need to be resolved. By encouraging research funders to support the current advances in the target areas more actively, as well as introducing new, patient-oriented principles of healthcare facilities management, one is likely to resolve the emergent conflicts in a fast and efficient manner (Devine et al., 2014).

Conclusion

Preventing the conflicts between stakeholders in the healthcare environment is barely possible due to the differences in the goals of the parties involve. However, there are essential points of contact in the identified visions, such as the pursuit of providing patients with efficient services and striving to help them recover faster, etc. Therefore, it is crucial to focus on the common goal in question, at the same time promoting the concept of sustainable use of resources, especially the financial ones, and a cost-efficient model. Thus, the process of enhancing the R&D-related processes, as well as developing a patient-centered approach, will become a possibility.

Reference List

Bravi, F., Gibertoni, D., Marcon, A., Sicotte, C., Minvielle, E., Rucci, R., Angelastroe, A., Carradori, T., & Fantini, M. P. (2012). Hospital network performance: A survey of hospital stakeholders’ perspectives. Health Policy, 109(2), 150-157. Web.

Devine,E. B., Alfonso-Cristancho, R., Devlin, A., Edwards, T. C., Farrokhi, E. T., Kessler, L.,… & Flum, D. R. (2013). A model for incorporating patient and stakeholder voices in a learning healthcare network: Washington State’s comparative effectiveness research translation network (CERTAIN). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(8), 122-129. Web.

Lambooij, M. S., & Hummel, M. J. (2013). Differentiating innovation priorities among stakeholder in hospital care. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(1), 91-102. Web.

Lehoux, P., Daudelin, G., Williams-Jones, B., Denis, J. L., & Longo, C. (2014). How do business model and health technology design influence each other? Insights from a longitudinal case study of three academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 43(6), 1025-1038. Web.

Mauro, M., Cardamone, E., Cavallaro, G., Minvielle, E., Rania, F., Sicotte, C., & Trotta., A. (2014). Teaching hospital performance: Towards a community of shared values? Social Science & Medicine, 101(1), 107-112. Web.

Yong, P. L., Olsen, L. A., & McGinnis, J. M. (2011). Value in health care: Accounting for cost, quality, safety, outcomes, and innovation. Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.

Click Here To Order Now!