Question

Based on the Case below, Write a brief explanation that explains why the case represents its particular ACHE competency domain. (Be sure that the explanation justifies the assigned competency domain based upon the facts and circumstances of the case.)

Case:

Case 1: Communication and Relationship Management

Memorial Hospital was moving rapidly to finalize its plans for new multiple-specialty outpatient center located 15 miles from the hospital campus. Strategically this was exactly what the health system needed to do. First, it would provide a presence in a community that traditionally was served by one of Memorial’s major competitors. And second, increased the ambulatory care services of the health system that lagged behind other health systems in this regard.

The plan called for seven specializations to provide services to the patient and community population of this new area and to help channel patients that needed more intense treatment and care to the hospital itself. Six departments had agreed to this arrangement and were actively developing their budgets and management resources to cover this new location. But the Department of Psychiatry, although an initial service slated for the ambulatory facility, was now backing out of the agreement suggesting that they could not adequately resource the operation and felt it would significantly increase their overall patient volume.

The CEO of the hospital understood that Psychiatry needed to be part of the service mix in order for this new facility to succeed. The market research conducted a year earlier to provide information on community needs, clearly suggested this service would be well received and perceived by people as a value addition to the other medical specialties being offered. With this sense of urgency in mind, the CEO arranged to meet with the Chair of Psychiatry and discuss the issue. The meeting took place within the next week and it was not a comfortable exchange according to the Chair. He felt pressured by the CEO to come on-board and develop the necessary budgetary and operational plans to be part of the new ambulatory center. From the perspective of the CEO, the meeting was equally non-productive. He reported that the Chair seemed to miss the critical points of why Psychiatry was needed as part of the service mix.

Two subsequent meetings took place by both individuals with significant ‘back and forth’ between the two men until an agreement was met. The Chair of Psychiatry agreed that his department would join the other services, but that it needed to be phased-in process. The CEO, although disappointed that Psychiatry would require six to eight months for full implementation into the facility, understood that this was the most reasonable approach he could expect.

The final agreement allowed Memorial Hospital to eventually offer all six services to its targeted community. It did require modifying some public relations materials and gaining the support of the other five services that this special arrangement was necessary to achieve the ultimate complement of services. The Department of Psychiatry gained the time it felt it needed to align its resources to add this service to its roster. The result was that Psychiatry actually achieved its adjusted operational program for the new facility in four and a half months, a good two months ahead of its original target date to begin operations. It is difficult to know exactly why the CEO and the Chair of Psychiatry arrived at their agreement. Both individuals did not appear too pleased with their initial exchange. Each seemed to have his own agenda without much interest in understanding the expectations of needs of the other party. It took two more projected meetings for a final agreement to be outlined. It is not clear either, what if any, long term affect this had for either the hospital administration or the leadership of the Department of Psychiatry. The general opinion throughout the administration and medical officers of the health system was the CEO paid a heavy political price for getting Psychiatry on board.

Answer 1

At its center, the correspondence and relationship administration competency is about how obviously pioneers comprehend the general population they work with and how viably they apply that learning in building superior working connections. The Healthcare Management Alliance distinguished areas related with this competency. A few of these areas center on connections and correspondence at the authoritative level. Different areas center on the departmental level. The rest of focused on the correspondence and relationship forms themselves.

Uprightness is regularly connected with its ethical definition that is, the gradation to which a pioneer sticks to a specific arrangement of qualities. While high moral principles are exceptionally vital in human services administration, morals is best described as fundamental yet not adequate for initiative viability. In the more extensive sense, pioneers are known to show respectability when the over-all populace they work with see their choices and activities as clear and reliable. All else break even with, pioneers who try looking for input from the over-all populace they work with, settling on choices in an efficient way, and disclosing their reasoning to those influenced by their choices will be understood as partaking higher trustworthiness.

While trustworthiness by and large spins around a person's lucidity of reason and activity, causing trust identifies with how a particular individual perspectives his or her working association with a particular pioneer. When in doubt, trust isn't given or picked up uninhibitedly; representatives won't confide in a pioneer until the point when that pioneer has earned their trust, through a blend of showing respectability and exhibiting that the pioneer comprehends and regards representatives' needs and needs. Once earned, trust conveys forward just with customary support and can undoubtedly be decreased through even a solitary carelessness. Pioneers need to endeavor to respect duties at whatever point they can; be that as it might, how pioneers handle fizzled duties can be considerably more vital in trust building. On the off chance that a pioneer can't respect a dedication, representatives will require and anticipate a clarification; that clarification will assemble trust in that it shows that the pioneer perceives the significance of pledge to workers and passes on responsibility and clear judgment. For instance, telling a representative.

In view of these rudiments, a chief or a pioneer can take after two critical ventures in growing more successful working connections. To start with, perceive the affiliation between successful relationship administration and by and large viability, and make a solid pledge to currently enhancing proficient connections. The firmer the responsibility, the more prominent the result.