Corporate Governance Failure and Implication in Bundaberg Hospital

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE FAILURE AND IMPLICATION
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

Introduction-
Corporate governance refers to the set of rules, regulation and procedures that has been created
to control and manage the organization effectively. It is necessary to have a basic set of rules so
that there can be stability in the organization. Corporate governance in hospitals is known as
clinical governance. Clinical governance refers to all the rules that are applicable to any health
organization incudes all the staff members as well as health specialists. Clinical governance also
takes care of the accountability and responsibility of giving quality care services to the customers
and to develop the organization in relation to customer satisfaction. Clinical governance assures
that all the requirement of the customers gets fulfilled in the best possible way.
Clinical Governance Failures in Bundaberg Hospital-
There is a failure of clinical governance in Bundaberg Hospital in Queensland and an inquiry
commission was formed for the whole investigation of the case (Garsten & Hernes, 2009). The
failure clearly reflects the irresponsible behavior and negligence of office staff. It includes the
irresponsibility of Dr. Jayant Patel. The findings of the case are mentioned below-
1. It was a matter of negligence as well as irresponsibility when Bundaberg Hospital
appointed Dr. Patel as a senior medical officer in 2003. Administration of the hospital has
not cross checked his documents in a proper way. They should have judged him in a
better way (Elegido, 2015).
2. The administration was failed in judging and testing the qualities, qualification, eligibility
and competency of Dr. Patel. They did not even check whether he is suitable to perform
the role of senior medical officer in surgery (Campling, 2008).

3. It has been found that the administration not only failed in the checking the documents of
Dr. Patel, but also showed carelessness in paper investigation on authenticity of
documents related to past experience and previous practice that he did in United States
(Akella, 2012). With the help of proper investigation, they would able to know that Dr.
Patel surrendered his license one year back and is unemployed from more than one year.
4. The appointment of Dr. Patel has been done without investigation of his documents as
well as his clinical competency required for the position of senior medical officer. Dr.
Nydam is the Acting Director of Medical Services and he also showed a high level of
irresponsibility and negligence in the procedure privileging and credentialing the policy
and guidelines of Queensland Health (Chitale, 2013).
5. Dr. Nydam was replaced from the position of Acting Director of Medical service and Dr.
Keating has got the position. In the same way, Dr. Nydam has also failed in assessing the
qualities of Dr. Patel. He is also unable to check and verify the credentials of policies and
guidelines for the hiring of Dr. Patel. The job of Dr. Patel got extended and his
registration has also been renewed in between of tenure.
6. According to Dr. Keating, the credentialing and privileging was only a part of the system
and he ignored the actual assessment part of checking the authenticity and background of
Dr. Patel (Elegido, 2015).
7. There was a very drastic result due to the hiring of Dr. Patel as there was 17 deaths due to
his fault as his working capabilities are very poor.
8. Dr. Patel does not possess the technical knowledge, judgement quality and ability to
handle any case.