Reconceptualising hospital performance management as a socio-organisational system: a scoping review.

IF 2.4 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Olga Schibli, Norbert Seyff, Doris Brandenberger, Thomas Ehrlich, Yiannis Kyratsis
{"title":"Reconceptualising hospital performance management as a socio-organisational system: a scoping review.","authors":"Olga Schibli, Norbert Seyff, Doris Brandenberger, Thomas Ehrlich, Yiannis Kyratsis","doi":"10.1136/leader-2026-001576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hospital performance management is frequently framed as a technical challenge centred on indicators, dashboards and analytics. Despite growing measurement infrastructures, many hospitals struggle to translate performance data into strategic leadership, effective governance and value-based improvement, suggesting that hospital performance management is a socio-organisational process shaped by leadership practices, institutional contexts and organisational dynamics. No review has systematically mapped how these socio-organisational dimensions are conceptualised across the hospital performance management literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews guidance, we conducted a scoping review across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL. From 2612 records identified, 1749 unique titles and abstracts were screened. Of these, 50 met inclusion criteria; a purposive subsample of 40 studies presenting system-level or integrative frameworks underwent in-depth conceptual analysis. Findings were inductively organised into four thematic domains: tools & data; people & change; policy & governance and value-based healthcare.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Hospital performance management emerges as a multidimensional, context-dependent and socially embedded phenomenon. In the included literature, performance measurement and performance management were frequently conflated, with implicit assumptions that indicator availability would translate into improvement. Technical solutions-including balanced scorecards, dashboards and analytics platforms-produced meaningful improvements only when embedded within supportive governance arrangements, engaged leadership and learning-oriented cultures. The balanced scorecard, while widely adopted, was selectively enacted according to dominant value orientations-functioning variably as a control, efficiency, learning or innovation tool depending on organisational context. Misalignment across technical tools, workforce dynamics, governance structures and value-based ambitions contributed to symbolic compliance and fragmented initiatives. A performance management architecture map and competing values framework interpretation are proposed to explain cross-study variation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hospital performance management failures stem less from inadequate indicators than from misalignment across measurement, governance, workforce and value-creation domains. Leaders should focus on aligning socio-organisational architectures, making value trade-offs explicit and using performance information to support organisational sense-making, coordination and learning rather than treating performance management as a compliance exercise.</p>","PeriodicalId":36677,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Leader","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Leader","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2026-001576","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hospital performance management is frequently framed as a technical challenge centred on indicators, dashboards and analytics. Despite growing measurement infrastructures, many hospitals struggle to translate performance data into strategic leadership, effective governance and value-based improvement, suggesting that hospital performance management is a socio-organisational process shaped by leadership practices, institutional contexts and organisational dynamics. No review has systematically mapped how these socio-organisational dimensions are conceptualised across the hospital performance management literature.

Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews guidance, we conducted a scoping review across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL. From 2612 records identified, 1749 unique titles and abstracts were screened. Of these, 50 met inclusion criteria; a purposive subsample of 40 studies presenting system-level or integrative frameworks underwent in-depth conceptual analysis. Findings were inductively organised into four thematic domains: tools & data; people & change; policy & governance and value-based healthcare.

Results: Hospital performance management emerges as a multidimensional, context-dependent and socially embedded phenomenon. In the included literature, performance measurement and performance management were frequently conflated, with implicit assumptions that indicator availability would translate into improvement. Technical solutions-including balanced scorecards, dashboards and analytics platforms-produced meaningful improvements only when embedded within supportive governance arrangements, engaged leadership and learning-oriented cultures. The balanced scorecard, while widely adopted, was selectively enacted according to dominant value orientations-functioning variably as a control, efficiency, learning or innovation tool depending on organisational context. Misalignment across technical tools, workforce dynamics, governance structures and value-based ambitions contributed to symbolic compliance and fragmented initiatives. A performance management architecture map and competing values framework interpretation are proposed to explain cross-study variation.

Conclusions: Hospital performance management failures stem less from inadequate indicators than from misalignment across measurement, governance, workforce and value-creation domains. Leaders should focus on aligning socio-organisational architectures, making value trade-offs explicit and using performance information to support organisational sense-making, coordination and learning rather than treating performance management as a compliance exercise.

将医院绩效管理重新定义为社会组织系统:范围审查。
背景:医院绩效管理经常被认为是一项以指标、仪表板和分析为中心的技术挑战。尽管测量基础设施不断发展,但许多医院仍难以将绩效数据转化为战略领导力、有效治理和基于价值的改进,这表明医院绩效管理是一个由领导实践、机构背景和组织动态形成的社会组织过程。没有审查系统地映射这些社会组织的维度是如何概念化整个医院绩效管理文献。方法:根据系统评价的首选报告项目和范围评价指南的元分析扩展,我们对PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus和CINAHL进行了范围评价。从确定的2612条记录中,筛选了1749个独特的标题和摘要。其中,50家符合入选标准;对40项提出系统级或综合框架的研究进行了深入的概念分析。研究结果被归纳为四个主题领域:工具和数据;人与变化;政策和治理以及基于价值的医疗保健。结果:医院绩效管理是一种多维的、情境依赖的、社会嵌入的现象。在所包括的文献中,绩效测量和绩效管理经常被混为一谈,并隐含地假设指标可用性将转化为改进。技术解决方案——包括平衡计分卡、仪表板和分析平台——只有在嵌入支持性治理安排、领导参与和学习型文化的情况下,才能产生有意义的改进。平衡计分卡虽然被广泛采用,但它是根据主导价值取向有选择地制定的——根据组织背景,它作为控制、效率、学习或创新工具的功能各不相同。技术工具、劳动力动态、治理结构和基于价值的野心之间的不一致导致了象征性的遵从和分散的计划。提出了绩效管理架构图和竞争价值框架解释来解释交叉研究差异。结论:医院绩效管理失败的原因与其说是指标不足,不如说是测量、治理、劳动力和价值创造领域的不协调。领导者应该专注于协调社会组织架构,明确价值权衡,并使用绩效信息来支持组织的意义制定、协调和学习,而不是将绩效管理视为合规练习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Leader
BMJ Leader Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.40%
发文量
57
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书