What passes and fails as health policy and management

David Chinitz, Victor G. Rodwin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The field of health policy and management (HPAM) faces a gap between theory, policy, and practice. Despite decades of efforts at reforming health policy and health care systems, prominent analysts state that the health system is "stuck" and that models for change remain "aspirational." We discuss four reasons for the failure of current ideas and models for redesigning health care: (1) the dominance of microeconomic thinking; (2) the lack of comparative studies of health care organizations and the limits of health management theory in recognizing the importance of local contexts; (3) the separation of HPAM from the rank and file of health care, particularly physicians; and (4) the failure to expose medical students to issues of HPAM. We conclude with suggestions for rethinking how the field of HPAMmight generate morepromising policies for health care providers and managers by abandoning the illusion of context-free theories and, instead, seeking to facilitate the processes by which organizations can learn to improve their own performance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1113-1126
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Health Politics, Policy and Law
Volume39
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Health Policy
Delivery of Health Care
Organizations
Health
Medical Students
Health Personnel
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

What passes and fails as health policy and management. / Chinitz, David; Rodwin, Victor G.

In: Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, Vol. 39, No. 5, 2014, p. 1113-1126.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1746b74cf55e47cf9c0d09ebe7ba8ce3,
title = "What passes and fails as health policy and management",
abstract = "The field of health policy and management (HPAM) faces a gap between theory, policy, and practice. Despite decades of efforts at reforming health policy and health care systems, prominent analysts state that the health system is {"}stuck{"} and that models for change remain {"}aspirational.{"} We discuss four reasons for the failure of current ideas and models for redesigning health care: (1) the dominance of microeconomic thinking; (2) the lack of comparative studies of health care organizations and the limits of health management theory in recognizing the importance of local contexts; (3) the separation of HPAM from the rank and file of health care, particularly physicians; and (4) the failure to expose medical students to issues of HPAM. We conclude with suggestions for rethinking how the field of HPAMmight generate morepromising policies for health care providers and managers by abandoning the illusion of context-free theories and, instead, seeking to facilitate the processes by which organizations can learn to improve their own performance.",
author = "David Chinitz and Rodwin, {Victor G.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1215/03616878-2813719",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "1113--1126",
journal = "Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law",
issn = "0361-6878",
publisher = "Duke University Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What passes and fails as health policy and management

AU - Chinitz, David

AU - Rodwin, Victor G.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The field of health policy and management (HPAM) faces a gap between theory, policy, and practice. Despite decades of efforts at reforming health policy and health care systems, prominent analysts state that the health system is "stuck" and that models for change remain "aspirational." We discuss four reasons for the failure of current ideas and models for redesigning health care: (1) the dominance of microeconomic thinking; (2) the lack of comparative studies of health care organizations and the limits of health management theory in recognizing the importance of local contexts; (3) the separation of HPAM from the rank and file of health care, particularly physicians; and (4) the failure to expose medical students to issues of HPAM. We conclude with suggestions for rethinking how the field of HPAMmight generate morepromising policies for health care providers and managers by abandoning the illusion of context-free theories and, instead, seeking to facilitate the processes by which organizations can learn to improve their own performance.

AB - The field of health policy and management (HPAM) faces a gap between theory, policy, and practice. Despite decades of efforts at reforming health policy and health care systems, prominent analysts state that the health system is "stuck" and that models for change remain "aspirational." We discuss four reasons for the failure of current ideas and models for redesigning health care: (1) the dominance of microeconomic thinking; (2) the lack of comparative studies of health care organizations and the limits of health management theory in recognizing the importance of local contexts; (3) the separation of HPAM from the rank and file of health care, particularly physicians; and (4) the failure to expose medical students to issues of HPAM. We conclude with suggestions for rethinking how the field of HPAMmight generate morepromising policies for health care providers and managers by abandoning the illusion of context-free theories and, instead, seeking to facilitate the processes by which organizations can learn to improve their own performance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908157853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908157853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1215/03616878-2813719

DO - 10.1215/03616878-2813719

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 1113

EP - 1126

JO - Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

JF - Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

SN - 0361-6878

IS - 5

ER -