SIBANDA, Mpumelelo (2019). Decision-making in English Clinical Commissioning Groups: A Mixed Methods Study. Doctoral, Sheffield Hallam University. [Thesis]
Documents
26110:545817
PDF
Sibanda_2019_DBA_DecisionMakingIn.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Sibanda_2019_DBA_DecisionMakingIn.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Download (8MB) | Preview
Abstract
This research primarily investigated the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in the
English NHS to identify factors influencing effective decision-making as perceived by
General Practitioners (GPs) with formal roles in CCGs. A study by the British Medical
Association (BMA) (2014a) revealed that GPs at practice level felt that CCGs were
developing policies that restrict efficient delivery of health care. As such, I developed a
hypothesised conceptual model demonstrating factors at play in the decision-making
process, which I tested using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLSSEM).
Alongside, informed by the conceptual model, was the qualitative strand, with
the data that I analysed under interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA).
Quantitative and qualitative data were collected simultaneously through a survey
using a questionnaire in a convergent parallel mixed methods design, underpinned by
a philosophical position of pragmatism. Data was collected in 2017. Research sample
consists of 73 GPs in the UK.
The hypothesis testing results show that GP Proportion has a significant and
positive effect on Decision-making Process Effectiveness. Similarly, the effect of GP
Influence has been found to be significant and positive on Satisfaction. In contrast, the
effect of GP Influence on Decision-making Process Effectiveness has been found to be
insignificant. This result is also observed regarding the effect of GP Influence on
Member Practice Wishes Met. Five key themes were identified from the qualitative
data analysis – namely, (1) Financial, focused on decisions influenced by financial
concerns, (2) Bureaucracy, centred on decisions influenced by the bureaucratic
hierarchy, (3) Clinical, to do with decisions that were perceived as having clinical
implications, (4) Workplace culture, focused on behavioural patterns affecting
decision-making within the organisation, and (5) CCG role, based on the way the role
of CCGs was understood by member practices and the way that engagement of
member practices was achieved by the respective CCGs.
The results contribute to theory and practice. Regarding practice,
notwithstanding the intended autonomy for the CCGs, which was aimed at improving
patient care by aligning health care commissioning decisions with local needs,
structure alone appears not enough to deliver effectiveness, as perceived by GPs. The
proportion of GPs was found to be a relevant factor, while leadership and local CCG
level culture, coupled with communication and governance, are also important.
Finance was found to be significant, with many concerns about CCG policies attributed
to this factor. On contribution to theory, the general observation is that the CCGs
appear to be moving from professional to bureaucratic organisational model
(Mintzberg 1979), thereby threatening the purported autonomy.
This study also revealed new information on the formal roles that GPs occupy
in CCGs, as previous research showed limited awareness in this regard (Checkland et
al. 2016). Information gathered on committee memberships and the positions GPs
occupy highlights the complexity and diversity of GP roles in CCGs.
More Information
Statistics
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Metrics
Altmetric Badge
Dimensions Badge
Share
Actions (login required)
View Item |