PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 13644014

Development program for administrators teaches them to think like executives.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F C LE ROCKER, R A ANDERSON. 1959. Development program for administrators teaches them to think like executives.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13644014/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Ethics, a neglected dimension of power relationships of physician leaders.

OBJECTIVE: Physician leaders in obstetrics and gynecology find themselves in complex power relationships with administrative subordinates, administrative peers, and administrative superiors. The ethical dimensions of these power relationships have not been examined previously. STUDY DESIGN: The authors draw on the work of 3 major historic figures (John Gregory, Thomas Hobbes, and Friedrich Hoffmann) to identify for the first time 3 major types of power relationships and organizational cultures. Gregorian power relationships and organizational cultures are characterized by shared fiduciary responsibility that advances the core mission of a health care organization. Hobbesian power relationships and organizational cultures are characterized by relentless self-interest in a zero-sum game. Hoffmannian power relationships and organizational cultures are characterized by enlightened self-interest in a win-win game. RESULTS: The authors analyze the ethical dimensions of power relationships of physician leaders with subordinates, peers, and superiors and of organizational cultures. CONCLUSION: The authors support transformational leadership toward Gregorian power relationships and organizational cultures, using, when necessary, Hoffmannian power relationships and organizational cultures as a way station.

Administrative Personnel↗

When one's main effect is another's error: material vs. psychosocial explanations of health disparities. A commentary on Macleod et al., "is subjective social status a more important determinant of health than objective social status? Evidence from a prospective observational study of Scottish men" (61(9), 2005, 1916-1929).

Two pathways by which socioeconomic factors result in health disparities are the material and the psychosocial. Recently, Macleod and colleagues reported on data showing that a subjective measure of workplace status was not as strongly related to mortality as were objective indicators and that another psychosocial measure, perceived stress, did not mediate the impact of these indicators [Macleod et al., 2005. Is subjective social status a more important determinant of health than objective social status? Evidence from a prospective observational study of Scottish men. Social Science & Medicine, 61(9), 1916-1929]. They suggest that the failure of these variables is indicative of the relative insignificance of psychosocial influences on health. This commentary argues for a different approach to examining these pathways. Efforts to demonstrate the failure of variables to predict health have the usual difficulties of trying to prove the null hypothesis. In this instance, problems in the conceptualization and measurement of psychosocial variables may account for the null results. Psychosocial and material factors are not mutually exclusive but, rather, are complementary. Unexplained variation in health when material factors are accounted for may be explained in part by psychosocial factors and vice versa. Collaboration between researchers who understand each of these domains will yield the greatest benefit in terms of understanding the processes leading to health disparities and providing multiple approaches for eliminating them.

Administrative Personnel↗