Impact of hospital mergers on staff job satisfaction: a quantitative study

Human Resources for Health

Ka Keat Lim¹ 

[1] Healthcare Statistics Unit, Clinical Research Centre, National Institute of Health, Ministry of Health Malaysia, 3rd Floor, MMA House, 124 Jalan Pahang 53000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

关键词: Difference-in-difference;    Event study;    Job satisfaction;    Hospital restructuring;    Hospital merger;   

Others  :  1135955
DOI  :  10.1186/1478-4491-12-70

 received in 2014-07-22, accepted in 2014-12-01,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Hospital mergers began in the UK in the late 1990s to deal with underperformance. Despite their prevalence, there is a lack of research on how such organizational changes affect the staff morale. This study aims to assess the impact of NHS hospital mergers between financial years 2009/10 and 2011/12 on staff job satisfaction and to identify factors contributing to satisfaction.

Methods

Data on staff job satisfaction were obtained from the annual NHS Staff Survey. A list of mergers was compiled using data provided by the Cooperation and Competition Panel and the Department of Health. Other sources of data included the NHS Hospital Estates and Facilities Statistics, the NHS ‘Quarter’ publication, official reports from health service regulators, individual hospitals’ annual accounts, data from the NHS Information Centre and the NHS Recurrent Revenue Allocations Exposition Book. Only full mergers of acute and mental health hospitals were analyzed. Propensity scores were generated using observable factors likely to affect merger decision to select three comparable hospitals for every constituent hospital in a merger to act as a control group. A difference-in-difference was estimated between baseline (3 years before merger approval) and each subsequent year up to 4 years post-merger, controlling for work environment, drivers of job satisfaction, data year, type of hospital and occupation group.

Results

There were nine mergers during the study period. Only job satisfaction scores 1 to 2 years before (0.03 to 0.04 point) and 1 year after merger approval (0.06 point) were higher (P < 0.01) than baseline. Robustness testing produced consistent findings. Assuming other conditions were equal, an increase in autonomy, staff support, perceived quality and job clarity ratings would increase job satisfaction scores. Higher job satisfaction scores were also associated with being classified as medical, dental, management or administrative staff and working in a mental health trust.

Conclusion

Hospital mergers have a small, transient positive impact on staff job satisfaction in the year immediately before and after merger approval. Continuous staff support and management of staff expectations throughout a merger may help to increase staff job satisfaction during the challenging period of merger.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Lim; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Borrill C, West M, Carter M, Dawson J: The Relationship Between Staff Satisfaction and Patient Satisfaction: Results from Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust. Birmingham: Aston Business School; 2003.
• [2]Dawson J: Health and Wellbeing of NHS Staff - A Benefit Evaluation Model. UK: The Work Foundation; 2009.
• [3]Peltier J, Dahl A, Mulhern F: The Relationship between Employee Satisfaction and Hospital Patient Experiences: Forum for People Performance Management & Measurement. 2009.
• [4]Pinder RJ, Greaves FE, Aylin PP, Jarman B, Bottle A: Staff perceptions of quality of care: an observational study of the NHS Staff Survey in hospitals in England. BMJ Qual Saf 2013, 22:563-570.
• [5]Cortvriend P: Change management of mergers: the impact on NHS staff and their psychological contracts. Health Serv Manage Res 2004, 17:177-187.
• [6]Fulop N, Protopsaltis G, Hutchings A, King A, Allen P, Normand C, Walters R: Process and impact of mergers of NHS trusts: multicentre case study and management cost analysis. BMJ 2002, 325:246.
• [7]Fulop N, Protopsaltis G, King A, Allen P, Hutchings A, Normand C: Changing organisations: a study of the context and processes of mergers of health care providers in England. Soc Sci Med 2005, 60:119-130.
• [8]Shaw J: Tracking the merger: the human experience. Health Serv Manage Res 2002, 15:211-222.
• [9]Corrigan P, Higton J, Morioka S: Takeover: Tackling Failing NHS Hospitals. London: Reform; 2012.
• [10]Health Education Authority: Healthy Ever after? Supporting Staff Through Merger and Beyond. London: Health Education Authority; 1999.
• [11]Gulliver P, Towell D, Peck E: Staff morale in the merger of mental health and social care organizations in England. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2003, 10:101-107.
• [12]Goddard S, Palmer A: An evaluation of the effects of a National Health Service Trust merger on the learning and development of staff. Hum Resour Dev Int 2010, 13:557-573.
• [13]Hofstede G: Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede Model in context. Online Readings Psychol Cult 2011., 2(1) http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=orpc webcite
• [14]Bedeian AG, Armenakis AA: A path-analytic study of the consequences of role conflict and ambiguity. Acad Manage J 1981, 24:417-424.
• [15]Jackson SE: Participation in decision making as a strategy for reducing job-related strain. J Appl Psychol 1983, 68:3-19.
• [16]Fielden S, Whiting F: The psychological contract: is the UK National Health Service a model employer? Health Serv Manage Res 2007, 20:94-104.
• [17]Gaynor M, Laudicella M, Propper C: Can governments do it better? Merger mania and hospital outcomes in the English NHS. J Health Econ 2012, 31:528-543.
• [18]House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts: Achievement of Foundation Trust Status by NHS Hospital Trusts: Sixth Report of Session 2010–12. London: The Stationary Office; 2011.
• [19]Department of Health: 2012–13 Update on Indicators of Financial Sustainability in the NHS. London: The Stationary Office; 2013.
• [20]Ham C, Dixon A: Tackling the problems of seriously challenged NHS providers. BMJ 2012, 344:e4422.
• [21]Stuart EA: Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Stat Sci 2010, 25:1-21.
• [22]Healthcare Commission and Aston University. Aston Business School: National Health Service National Staff Survey, 2008. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive; 2008. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-6569-1 webcite]
• [23]Care Quality Commission and Aston University. Aston Business School: National Health Service National Staff Survey, 2009. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive; 2009. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-6570-1 webcite]
• [24]Care Quality Commission and Aston University. Aston Business School: National Health Service National Staff Survey, 2010. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive; 2010. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-6957-1 webcite]
• [25]Care Quality Commission and Picker Institute Europe: National Health Service National Staff Survey, 2011. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive; 2011. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-7203-1 webcite]
• [26]Care Quality Commission and Picker Institute Europe: National Health Service National Staff Survey, 2012. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive; 2012. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-7246-1 webcite]
• [27]Co-operation and Competition Panel case archive [http://live.monitor.precedenthost.co.uk/regulating-health-care-providerscommissioners/cooperation-and-competition/archive-co-operation-and--5 webcite]
• [28]Hospital Estates and Facilities Statistics [http://hefs.hscic.gov.uk/ webcite]
• [29]The Quarter [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130107105354/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsStatistics/DH_087335 webcite]
• [30]NHS Staff Survey Coordination Centre: Guidance for the NHS Staff Survey 2012. Oxford: NHS Staff Survey Coordination Centre; 2012.
• [31]Becker SO, Ichino A: Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. STATA J 2002, 2:358-377.
• [32]Department of Health: Principles and Rules for Cooperation and Competition. London: Department of Health; 2010.