Strategic management and performance differences: Nonprofit versus for-profit health organizations

被引:12
作者
Reeves, TC [1 ]
Ford, EW
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Sch Business Adm, Milwaukee, WI 53201 USA
[2] Tulane Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Trop Med, New Orleans, LA 70118 USA
关键词
financial performance; for-profit organizations; nonprofit organizations; Rasch analysis; strategic management;
D O I
10.1097/00004010-200410000-00006
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Despite mixed and contradictory findings, for-profits (FPs) and nonprofits (NPs) are assumed to be similar health services organizations (HSOs). in this study, a fifteen-item scale assessing HSOs' strategic management capacity was developed and tested using fifty-seven FP? and twenty NP organizations. Then, using item response theory, the items were hierarchically profiled to produce two strategic profile models, a general and an FP anchored model. We find that deviation from the general profile, but not capability attainment level, is related to two of three financial measures. We conclude that studying FPs and NPs together is appropriate.
引用
收藏
页码:298 / 308
页数:11
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2010, APPL RASCH MODEL FUN
[2]   FIRM RESOURCES AND SUSTAINED COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE [J].
BARNEY, J .
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 1991, 17 (01) :99-120
[3]   Mission statement content and hospital performance in the Canadian not-for-profit health care sector [J].
Bart, CK .
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 1999, 24 (03) :18-29
[4]  
Becker Edmund R, 2002, J Health Care Finance, V29, P23
[5]  
Berle AdolfA., 1991, MODERN CORPORATION P
[6]  
CLEVERLEY WO, 1995, FINANCIAL STRATEGIES
[7]  
Devereaux PJ, 2002, CAN MED ASSOC J, V166, P1399
[8]  
Eisenhardt KM, 2000, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V21, P1105, DOI 10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1105::AID-SMJ133>3.0.CO
[9]  
2-E
[10]   The role of profit status under imperfect information: evidence from the treatment patterns of elderly Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for psychiatric diagnoses [J].
Ettner, SL ;
Hermann, RC .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2001, 20 (01) :23-49