Critical Analysis of Health Leadership and Management Report

This report provides a critical analysis of a paper on health leadership and management, focusing on clinical process redesign. The author argues that clinical process redesign significantly improves healthcare delivery, especially in emergency departments and elective surgery programs. The report highlights key criteria for successful implementation and sustainability, including leadership, patient focus, and data access. However, it also identifies potential biases, such as a lack of discussion about challenges and limited scope. The analysis emphasizes the importance of effective health leadership in improving patient outcomes and staff well-being. The report suggests that senior management involvement, engagement of clinical leaders, and a focus on the patient journey are crucial for successful implementation. The conclusion reinforces the power of clinical process redesign while also recommending further research to validate the findings across different healthcare organizations.

Running head: HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Introduction:
With the growing prevalence of disease, the quality of the patient-centric care is
intensifying throughout the world. To meet the demand of the patient it is crucial to redesign
clinical process which would further facilitate the patient-centric care, sustain the business,
increase patient satisfaction and reduce the global burden of disease. As discussed by Lega,
Prenestini & Rosso, (2017), the process of clinical process redesigning is not new in the industry
but because of complexities, it is recently introduced in the health care system. Although it is a
difficult process to implement in the health care system, with the associate of certain factors it
can be possible to implement and sustainability (Scott et al., 2018). The leadership in health care
and management is highlighted as one of the crucial parts of implementing these reformed
clinical process and sustaining the continuous improvement in health care. The purpose of the
paper is to address an argument with raised in a paper and critically analyze the paper for
providing future implications.
Discussion:
Authors central arguments and conclusions:
In the paper, McGrath et al. (2008) argued that clinical process redesign has allowed the
significant improvement in the delivery of the health care facilities, especially in the emergency
department’s as well as d elective surgery programs. The clinical process redesigning showed
significant improvement in the New South Wales as well as Flinders Medical Centre in South
Australia with noticeable benefits for health care staffs and patient. Apart from the argument, the
researchers also outlined the key standards for effective usage of this clinical process redesign in
implementing and sustaining improvement. The authors also concluded that the clinical process
redesigning hold the potential to sustain improvement.

2
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
As discussed by Bengtsson (2016), it is one of the crucial features of an evidence based
argumentative paper is clear and concise formation of argument giving a clear understanding of
the relevant issue and supported by range evidence. McGrath et al. (2008) presented the
argument discussed above and also key features of the successfully implementing the clinical
process redesigning which was supported by a range of peer reviewed journals until 2007.
The information and argumentation of paper :
Although McGrath et al. (2008) presented the argument accurately highlighting factors
required for the successful implementation and sustainability of the clinical process redesign, the
information of the appear shows few potential biases. According to Bengtsson (2016), potentials
baizes in the study interrupted the scientific information and distort the measurement process.
McGrath et al. (2008) Highlighted that the key criteria for the successful implementation and
sustainability include leadership by senior executives, focus on the patient journey, clinical
leadership, team-based problem solving, access of data, amorous targets, strong management of
performance , a strong process of improvement. The researcher’s also highlighted suitability of
the process is the most challenging part which depends on the standard of the work involving
individual and teamwork, maintenance of improved standard work by each layer of employment
and a system of improvement through continuous mitigation of the issues. The process owners
are the key player in this case to evaluate each process and criteria discussed above. A regular
meeting with all stakeholders of the health care organization is required to sustain the process
and improves high patient-centered care.
Despite the authors highlighted key criteria, the information bias highlighted in the
paper. The researchers only highlighted the ideal criteria for the successful implementation and

3
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
sustainability of clinical process redesign. They did not describe any challenges observed during
implementation and mitigation process of resolving those challenges (Leung, 2015). Moreover,
the study only highlighted the success of the process in the two hospitals, highlighting the
homogeneity of the result. Besides, the researchers conducted the second study based on the data
of two hospitals to present the argument, no primary study was undertaken to provide the
evidenced of argumentation (Sutton & Austin, 2015). Therefore, the detailed experimental study
is required through exploring different health care organization for evaluating the validity of the
research.
Author’s Conclusion and implication for health leadership and management:
The authors concluded that clinical process redesigning is a powerful tool to improve
the system which regulates the delivery of the health care services. It has provided the benefit for
the staffs and patients by facilitating the patient flow as well as improving the experiences and
health outcome for the patients. This process can be sustained by the health care service
providers by conducting daily meetings with the stakeholders to identify the internal problem of
the health care sectors faced by the clinicians.
The implication for health leadership and management:
Despite increasing awareness of the importance of leadership in the health care sector, the
competencies of effective leadership are limited. Although the physician becomes an influential
leader to influence the patient and performance in the diverse clinical team and the direction of
the major health care organization, very few physicians able to show the leadership in the
clinical practice. Therefore, the importance of the effective health care leadership is difficult to

4
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
overestimate as leadership not only improves the major clinical outcome in patients but also able
to promote the wellbeing of patient and staffs in the clinical practice. Therefore, the study
conducted by McGrath et al. (2008), has a significant validity in health leadership and
management. McGrath et al. (2008) highlighted a few factors discussed before required to
successful implementation and sustainability of the clinical process redesign. The authors
suggested that visible involvement of the senior and management and chief management is
essential for the growth of health care organization (Brewster, Tarrant & Dixon-Woods, 2016).
The researchers suggested that senior management requires to set a benchmark for service
delivery and facilitate the changes. This evidence further helps health leadership and
management to set parameters and benchmarks for the validated solution and ensuring strategies
to implement set timeframes and budgets along with the monitoring the performance of each
employee. . McGrath et al. (2008) highlighted that it is crucial for the management to engage the
clinical leaders for implementing the process of redesign. Therefore, the research would assist
the health leaders and management to engage the clinical leaders in the process. McGrath et al.
(2008) highlighted other factors associated with clinical process redesign which would further
help health leaders and management to focus on the individual journey of the patient within a
group of patients who requires similar health care services. The study will further assist the
health leader and management to involve the stakeholder in the process, testing their opinion and
argument against available data since the redesigning process requires advanced management
system (Scott et al., 2018). The study assists the researchers to gain the understanding of the
internal and external process of the health care organization with the collaboration of the health
care professionals, staffs and mitigate the issues with collaboration. These processes further help

5
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
to achieve high patient satisfaction, high performance of the health care professionals and
increase the growth of the health care sectors.
Conclusion:
To conclude, the paper presented an argument which was raised in the journal discussed
above. The main argument presented by researchers is that clinical process redesign has
permitted the significant improvement in the delivery of the health care facilities, especially in
the emergency department’s as well as elective surgery programs. Although the researchers
highlighted factors required for the successful implementation and sustainability of the clinical
process redesign, the information shows few potential biases. The detailed experimental study is
required through exploring different health care organization for evaluating the validity of the
research. The research would be helpful to engage the clinical leaders, access the health care
data and mitigate the process with stakeholders

6
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
References:
Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content
analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8-14.
Brewster, L., Tarrant, C., & Dixon-Woods, M. (2016). Qualitative study of views and
experiences of performance management for healthcare-associated infections. Journal of
Hospital Infection, 94(1), 41-47.
Heath, M., Appan, R., & Gudigantala, N. (2017). Exploring Health Information Exchange (HIE)
Through Collaboration Framework: Normative Guidelines for IT Leadership of
Healthcare Organizations. Information Systems Management, 34(2), 137-156.
Lega, F., Prenestini, A., & Rosso, M. (2017). Leadership research in healthcare: a realist
review. Health services management research, 30(2), 94-104.
Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of
family medicine and primary care, 4(3), 324.
McGrath, K. M., Bennett, D. M., Ben-Tovim, D. I., Boyages, S. C., Lyons, N. J., & O'Connell,
T. J. (2008). Implementing and sustaining transformational change in health care: lessons
learned about clinical process redesign. Medical Journal of Australia, 188(6), S32.
Scott, J., Simpson, B., Skelton-Green, J., & Munro, S. (2018). Building Healthcare Leadership
Capacity: Strategy, Insights and Reflections. Nursing leadership (Toronto, Ont.), 31(4),
10-21.
Sutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative research: data collection, analysis, and
management. The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy, 68(3), 226.

7
HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT