Top

BMC Health Services Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

Network governance forms in healthcare: empirical evidence from two Italian cancer networks

Authors: Anna Romiti, Mario Del Vecchio, Gino Sartor

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2020

Abstract

Background

This study focuses on the application of Provan and Kenis’ modes of network governance to the specific field of public healthcare networks, extending the framework to an analysis of systems in which networks are involved. Thus, the aim of this study is to analyze and compare the governance of two cancer networks in two Italian regions that underwent system reconfiguration processes due to reforms in the healthcare system.

Methods

A qualitative study of two clinical networks in the Italian healthcare system was conducted. The sample for interviews included representatives of the regional administration (n = 4), network coordinators (n = 6), and general and clinical directors of health organizations involved in the two networks (n = 25). Data were collected using semi-structured interviews.

Results

Our study shows that healthcare system reforms have a limited impact on network governance structures. In fact, strong inertial tendencies characterize networks, especially network administrative organization models (NAO). Networks tend to find their own balance with respect to the trade-offs analyzed using a mix of formal and informal ties. Our study confirms the general validity of Provan and Kenis’ framework and shows how other specific factors and contingencies may affect the possibility that cancer networks find positive equilibria between competing needs of inclusivity and efficiency, internal and external legitimacy, and stability and flexibility. It also shows how networks react to external changes.

Conclusions

Our study shows the importance of considering three factors and contingencies that may affect network effectiveness: a) the importance of looking at network governance modes not in isolation, but in relationship to the governance of regional systems; b) the influence of a specific network’s governance structure on the network’s ability to respond to tensions and to achieve its goals; and c) the need to take into account the role of professionals in network governance.

Available only for authorised users

Addicott R, Ferlie E. Understanding power relationships in health care networks. J Health Organ Manag. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777260710778925.

Tremblay D, Touati N, Roberge D, Breton M, Roch G, Denis JL, et al. Understanding cancer networks better to implement them more effectively: a mixed methods multi-case study. Implement Sci. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13012-016-0404-8.

Rodríguez C, Langley A, Béland F, Denis JL. Governance, power, and mandated collaboration in an interorganizational network. Adm Soc. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399706297212.

Iedema R, Verma R, Wutzke S, Lyons N, McCaughan B. A network of networks: the governance of deliberative approaches to healthcare improvement and reform. J Health Organ Manag. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-07-2016-0146.

Alberti VF. Le ragioni e gli obiettivi della ricerca. In: Alberti VF, Tozzi VD, Pinelli N, Sartirana M, editors. Il ruolo delle aziende sanitarie nelle reti cliniche in Italia. Roma: Iniziative Sanitarie; 2012. p. 17–20.

Provan KG, Kenis P. Modes of network governance: structure, management, and effectiveness. J Publ Adm Res Theor. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015.

Willem A, Gemmel P. Do governance choices matter in health care networks? An exploratory configuration study of health care networks. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-229.

Raab J, Mannak RS, Cambré B. Combining structure, governance, and context: a configurational approach to Network Effectiveness. J Publ Adm Res Theor. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut039.

Kenis P, Provan KG. Towards an exogenous theory of public network performance. Public Adm. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01775.x.

10.

Popp JK, Casebeer A. Be careful what you ask for: things policy-makers should know before mandating networks. Health Manage Forum. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0840470415599113.

11.

Saz-Carranza A. The power dynamics of mandated network administrative organizations. Public Adm Rev. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12445.

12.

Ferlie E, Fitzgerald L, McGivern G, Dopson S, Bennett C. Making wicked problems governable? The case of managed networks in health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.CrossRef

13.

Cantarelli P, Lega F, Longo F. La regione capogruppo sanitaria: assetti istituzionali e modelli organizzativi emergenti. In: Cergas Bocconi, editor. Rapporto OASI 2017. Milano: Egea; 2017. p. 363–80.

14.

Oliver C. Determinants of interorganizational relationships: integration and future directions. Acad Manag Rev. 1990. https://doi.org/10.2307/258156.

15.

Turrini A, Cristofoli D, Frosini F, Nasi G. Networking literature about determinants of network effectiveness. Public Adm. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01791.x.

16.

Ouchi WG. Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Adm Sci Q. 1980. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392231.

17.

Mcguire M, Agranoff R. The limitations of public management networks. Public Adm. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01917.x.

18.

Provan KG, Lemaire RH. Core concepts and key ideas for understanding public sector organizational networks: using research to inform scholarship and practice. Public Adm Rev. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02595.x.

19.

Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Adm Sci Q. 1997. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393808.

20.

Segato F, Raab J. Mandated network formation. Int J Public Sect Manag. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-01-2018-0018.

21.

Cristofoli D, Markovic J, Meneguzzo M. Governance, management and performance in public networks : how to be successful in shared-governance networks. J Manag Gov. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-012-9237-2.

22.

McInnes E, Haines M, Dominello A, Kalucy D, Jammali-Blasi A, Middleton S, Klineberg E. What are the reasons for clinical network success? A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-1096-5.

23.

McInnes E, Middleton S, Gardner G, Haines M, Haertsch M, Paul CL, Castaldi P. A qualitative study of stakeholder views of the conditions for and outcomes of successful clinical networks. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-49.

24.

Agranoff R, McGuire M. After the network is formed. process, power and performance. In: Mandell M, editor. Getting results through collaboration networks and network structures for public policy and management. Westport: Quorum Books; 2001. p. 11–29.

25.

Ferlie E, Fitzgerald L, McGivern G, Dopson S, Exworthy M. Networks in health care: a comparative study of their management, impact and performance. In: Report for the National Institute for Health Research Service Delivery and Organisation programme, Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO; 2010.

26.

Kapucu N, Van Wart M. The evolving role of the public sector in managing catastrophic disasters: lessons learned. Adm Soc. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399706289718.

27.

Park SH. Managing an interorganizational network: a framework of the institutional mechanism for network control. Organ Stud. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069601700505.

28.

Watts DJ, Strogatz SH. Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature. 1998. https://doi.org/10.1038/30918.

29.

Dagnino GB, Levanti G, Mocciaro L, Destri A. Structural dynamics and intentional governance in strategic interorganizational network evolution: a multilevel approach. Organ Stud. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840615625706.

30.

Gulati R, Sytch M, Tatarynowicz A. The rise and fall of small worlds: exploring the dynamics of social structure. Organ Sci. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0592.

31.

Sheaff R, Benson L, Farbus L, Schofield J, Mannion R, Reeves D. Network resilience in the face of health system reform. Soc Sci Med. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.11.011.

32.

Burt RS. Brokerage and closure: an introduction to social capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.

33.

Uzzi B, Spiro J. Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. Am J Sociol. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1086/432782.

34.

Eisenhardt KM. Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557.

35.

Yin RK. Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999;34:1209–24 doi:org/citeulike-article-id:6670384.PubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Miles M, Huberman A. Qualitative data analysis. Newbury Park: Sage; 1994.

37.

Morando V, Tozzi V. Processi evolutivi delle reti oncologiche tra dinamiche istituzionali e manageriali. In: Cergas Bocconi, editor. Rapporto OASI 2014. Milano: Egea; 2014. p. 521–51.

38.

Del Vecchio M, Romiti A. Il riaccentramento nel contesto pubblico: implicazioni per il governo dei sistemi e delle aziende sanitarie. Azienda Pubblica. 2017;1:13–32.

39.

Prades J, Morando V, Tozzi VD, Verhoeven D, Germà JR, Borras JM. Managing cancer care through service delivery networks: the role of professional collaboration in two European cancer networks. Health Serv Manag Res. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951484817745219.

40.

Leavy P. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014.CrossRef

41.

Boeije H. A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020909529486.

42.

Lambotte F, Meunier D. From bricolage to thickness: making the most of the messiness of research narratives. Qual Res Org Manage Int J. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465641311327531.

43.

Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Disciplining the practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011. p. 1–20.

44.

Jennings G, Kensbock S, Junek O, Radel K, Kachel U. Lived experiences of early career researchers: learning about and doing grounded theory. J Hosp Tour Manag. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1375/jhtm.17.1.21.

45.

Yin RK. Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: Guildford Press; 2011.

46.

Raich M, Müller J, Abfalter D. Hybrid analysis of textual data. Manag Decis. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2012-0247.

47.

Flick U. An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage; 2009.

48.

Del Vecchio M, Romiti A. Nuovi Scenari per la governance delle aziende e dei sistemi sanitari regionali. In: Del Vecchio M, Pinelli N, Ripa di Meana F, Romiti A, Tanese A, editors. Aziende e management per il futuro del SSN. Roma: KOS; 2017. p. 17–20.

49.

Lega F, Tozzi VD. Il cantiere delle reti cliniche in Italia: analisi e confronto di esperienze in oncologia. In: Cantù E, editor. L’aziendalizzazione della sanità in Italia. Rapporto OASI 2009. Milano: Egea; 2009. p. 249–72.

50.

Hillebrand B, Biemans W. The relationship between internal and external cooperation: literature review and propositions. J Bus Res. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00258-2.

Title: Network governance forms in healthcare: empirical evidence from two Italian cancer networks
Authors: Anna Romiti
Mario Del Vecchio
Gino Sartor
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05867-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Network governance forms in healthcare: empirical evidence from two Italian cancer networks

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Changes in practitioners’ attitudes, perceived training needs and self-efficacy over the implementation process of an evidence-based parenting program

Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study

Acute care pathways for patients calling the out-of-hours services

Improving quality of stroke care through benchmarking center performance: why focusing on outcomes is not enough

Physicians’ preventive practices: more frequently performed for male patients and by female physicians

Implementation and adoption of a health insurance support tool in the electronic health record: a mixed methods analysis within a randomized trial