A633.4.3.RB – Changing Dynamics of Leadership

Leading in an innovative climate is becoming to be paramount that it gives organizations stronger position from competitors, it generates consumers’ favor or appetite apropos to the organizations’ offering, and innovation magnifies organizations’ capacity to impact the global market.  Although innovation is geared towards increasing efficiency and reducing the cost for the customers, we also have to keep in mind that change is a result of the creativity of the human minds.  According to Reeves and Deimler (2011), most strategies’ aim is building a continuing competitive advantage through sustaining market positioning that is creative.  Organizations adopt strategic reviews sporadically to develop their organizational structure and direction based on an assessment of their industry (Reeves & Deimler, 2011). 

            While different research in innovation has provided a higher understanding and perception of the social, economic and individual benefits extrapolated from new technologies, there has been minimal significance in the dialogues regarding the probability of detrimental effect that innovation may induce (Edgell & Vogl, 2013).  According to Carmeli, Gelbard, & Gefen (2010), organizations are steadfastly finding different avenues to cultivate internal and external strategic fit because the fit is not only critical to organizations’ capacity to change and conform to contingencies that are unforeseen and can act as an impediment to unauthenticity.  Carmeli et al., (2010), defined fit as an organization’s demands, goals, objectives, and needs on one component are congruent or aligned with the another component’s demands, goals, objectives, and needs.

Leadership Decision-Making, Innovation, & Challenges

            In our organization, diversification, and growth are driving how we manage finances and our workforce directing a higher level of flexibility and scalability.  The required regulatory changes are forcing our Executive Leadership in restructuring cost management, engaging employees in decision-making to fully leverage talents, and data changing resulting in adopting new technologies that reinforce imperatives cost and P&L governance gearing to a value-added reporting and analysis.  Although new technology-based product development is one of the most explanatory variables for a beneficial organization performance (Suzuki, 2014), we can also say that exploitative and exploratory innovation significantly influence organizational performance (Suzuki, 2014).  According to Suzuki (2014), exploitation relates to increased efficiency, organizational improvements and incremental adjustments while exploration equates to new possibilities, radical or revolutionary change, and diversified generation.

            Our corporate leadership focuses on innovating for a better future for our patients, employees, community, and stakeholders, in short, leadership and innovation are interrelated.  According to Hoch and Kunreuther (2005), today’s business environment has become a labyrinth of data information that is mostly driven by the internet or advanced technology.  My current organization has been standardizing policies, procedures, and system technologies within the 52 hospitals.  In the East Florida Region where my company is located, we have struggled with the decision making of our Corporate Executives.  Our local Executive Officers, unfortunately, can only assure us that things will get better.

Navigating Data-Rich Environments

Our organization built the information base across the board by deciding to change to a new business model called Shared Services utilizing PeopleSoft application.  Shared Services will be responsible for AHS’s Talent Acquisition, Payroll, Supply Chain, and Human Resources Administration.  Corporate decided to use Waterman Hospital as the Alpha campus to roll-out the new business model.  The go-live implementation did not meet the expectations of the Executive Leaders, employees, and its stakeholders.  At least 30% of the new system was not working appropriately.  There were issues with Payroll, Talent Acquisition, and Supply Chain.  Some of the technological problems discovered were, position requisitions were not posting on the website, candidates can’t complete their application submission, supervisors were not able to complete purchasing supplies request, paid days off were not recalculating accurately, etc. 

Our campus at Memorial Medical Center was selected to be the Beta campus which meant, whatever did not work at Waterman, needed to be fixed before our go-live.  The announcement was made six months before the go-live and panic-stricken among the department heads and most specifically the clinical employees.  Yes, the “why” behind the system change was communicated, but I believe it was not 100% understood by hospital employees and its stakeholders.  For every change management, transparency and open communication are of utmost importance. 

I have always believed that useful communication and transparency from the executive leaders is the key element to the success of a leader and any change management within the organization.  Open communication is essential in strategic alignment and accountability that comes with change either in leadership or system technology to empower the employees and stakeholders in buying-in to leadership initiatives.  This is where the executive leaders were a little bit short.  The efficiency of the system should have been tested over and over until all possible technological problems were identified before going live with Shared Services & PeopleSoft application.  Shared Services were paid to make sure that our organization’s data mining and data warehousing were accurately and efficiently working before the go-live of Waterman and the Florida Hospital Memorial Medical Center. 

Navigating Multistakeholder and Environmental Complexity

Our organization uses to make decisions to improve and develop the standardization across the 52 campuses continuously is listening to stakeholders.  When the first and second go-live with Shared Services’ outcome was not to par or every stakeholders’ expectations, Adventist Health System’s Executive Leadership sat down with Shared Services to lay down expected results and timeline.  Linking Shared Services mapping process and aligning AHS’ mission of “Extending the Healing Ministries of Christ” and company strategy cannot be in jeopardy due to systems failure or employees and stakeholders unable to perform their tasks due to data error or inability to hire skilled and able clinical or non-clinical team members. 

My two-cents with the Corporate Executive decisions regarding the implementation of Shared Services and utilization of PeopleSoft application should have been implemented at the Corporate level.  The primary constraints experienced by Waterman and the East Florida Region Hospitals’ employees and stakeholders’ perceived lack of confidence in the new business model by Corporate Executive Leaders.  From the employees’ standpoint, if Shared Services is that useful from a strategic point of view, then why did the new business model not implemented at the Corporate Office first to ensure that the model/system was working as expected before implementation to other AHS hospitals.  Shared Services business model is very efficient and effective in establishing governance and procedures, optimizing workforce within process improvement and work consolidation as long as all systems function as anticipated.

Navigating Systemic Complexity

After the challenges, we faced from the go-live of Shared Services and People Soft; Corporate Executive Leadership decided to enhance our PeopleSoft application.  With the enhanced PeopleSoft application we can efficiently manage the organizational workforce to lessen the loss of productivity and time by strategically tracking absences, work time, and appropriately schedule our workforce labor.  It gives us opportunities to forecast workload demand and work, and define the workforce programs to meet our operational objectives and capture employees’ time worked and absences in adherence to federal and state labor and pay rules.  With the enhanced PeopleSoft Supplier Relationship Management systematically integrates procurement with Human Resources to administer full time, part time, per diem, and contingent workforce management.  The enhancement has been communicated to the hospitals’ leadership and employees on a regular basis to lessen if not avoid past confusion and misunderstanding.  Executive Leaders are more transparent and open with their line of communication at this time.

In summary, as a healthcare organization, healthcare reforms and the consumers’ shift to value are pushing agencies like mine to deliver enhanced outcomes and patient experienced at a reduced cost.  We are under pressure from regulatory agencies to align our patient care standards and initiatives in providing high-quality patient care with cost efficiency.  Organizations like mine are trying to reassess our existing capabilities and technology to manage our workforce, finances, and elevate our standard of patient experience re-defining focus on investments to best approach the challenges we face and expand for the future.

A powerful way to encourage a culture of innovation is to focus or aim our direction to usefulness, today and in the future.  Insight to Innovation pathway will be useful and efficient if organizations make their determination to new ideas based on potential value (Edgell and Vogl, 2013).  Innovation needs a rebellious innovator as its refuge for creativity that is practicable.  But the challenge for organizations is how to influence or create a climate or culture of practical creativity.  Organizational leaders will need for their workforce to care or conform to the overall success of the organization as a whole and develop new methodologies or strategies by utilizing new game theory when playing in today's world of networked. 

References

Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R., & Gefen, D. (2010). The Importance of Innovation Leadership in

Cultivating Strategic Fit and Enhancing firm performance. The Leadership Quarterly, Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 339-349, ISN 1048-9843.  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984310000494.

Edgell, R. & Vogl, R. (2013). A Theory of Innovation: Benefit, Harm, and Legal Regimes, Law,

            Innovation and Technology, 5:1, 21-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/17579961.5.1.21.

Hoch, S. J., & Kunreuther, H. C. (2005). Wharton on making decisions. (1st edition.).

Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Reeves, M. & Deimler, M. (2011). Adaptability: the new competitive advantage. Harvard

Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2011/07/adaptability-the-new-competitive-advantage.

Suzuki, O. (2015). Unpacking performance benefits of innovation ambidexterity: Evidence from

the pharmaceutical industry. Management Revue, 26(4), 328-348. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1688/mrev-2015-04-Suzuki.