Barriers and Facilitators to Innovation: A Qualitative Study in a Non-Profit Health Care System.

IF 6.5 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Melissa Gulden, Pierre Noel, Christopher Russi, Amy Low, Brian Kilen, Erik Hollander
{"title":"Barriers and Facilitators to Innovation: A Qualitative Study in a Non-Profit Health Care System.","authors":"Melissa Gulden, Pierre Noel, Christopher Russi, Amy Low, Brian Kilen, Erik Hollander","doi":"10.1016/j.mayocp.2026.08.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore how users within a non-profit healthcare system perceive, navigate, and engage with the organization's innovation management process and to identify barriers and facilitators influencing innovation participation PATIENTS AND METHODS: A qualitative study using Constructivist Grounded Theory was conducted at Mayo Clinic from May 1, 2025, through June 30, 2025. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were completed with team members representing multiple innovation adopter categories. Interview transcripts were analyzed using Constructivist Grounded Theory methods, including open, axial, and selective coding to identify recurring patterns related to innovation barriers and facilitators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thematic analysis identified six primary barriers to innovation engagement: fragmented pathways, siloed communication, limited resources, lack of clarity, cultural inertia, and leadership inconsistency. Five primary facilitators emerged: leadership support, mentorship, collaboration, recognition, and risk tolerance. Participants emphasized the importance of transparent innovation pathways, organizational alignment, and psychological safety in supporting innovation efforts and advancing ideas toward implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Innovation within large non-profit healthcare systems is shaped by both structural and cultural factors. Findings suggest that formalized, transparent innovation frameworks supported by leadership engagement, collaboration, and resource accessibility may strengthen participation, improve navigation of innovation processes, and facilitate the translation of ideas into meaningful organizational outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":18334,"journal":{"name":"Mayo Clinic proceedings","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mayo Clinic proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2026.08.014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore how users within a non-profit healthcare system perceive, navigate, and engage with the organization's innovation management process and to identify barriers and facilitators influencing innovation participation PATIENTS AND METHODS: A qualitative study using Constructivist Grounded Theory was conducted at Mayo Clinic from May 1, 2025, through June 30, 2025. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were completed with team members representing multiple innovation adopter categories. Interview transcripts were analyzed using Constructivist Grounded Theory methods, including open, axial, and selective coding to identify recurring patterns related to innovation barriers and facilitators.

Results: Thematic analysis identified six primary barriers to innovation engagement: fragmented pathways, siloed communication, limited resources, lack of clarity, cultural inertia, and leadership inconsistency. Five primary facilitators emerged: leadership support, mentorship, collaboration, recognition, and risk tolerance. Participants emphasized the importance of transparent innovation pathways, organizational alignment, and psychological safety in supporting innovation efforts and advancing ideas toward implementation.

Conclusion: Innovation within large non-profit healthcare systems is shaped by both structural and cultural factors. Findings suggest that formalized, transparent innovation frameworks supported by leadership engagement, collaboration, and resource accessibility may strengthen participation, improve navigation of innovation processes, and facilitate the translation of ideas into meaningful organizational outcomes.

创新的障碍和促进因素:非营利性医疗保健系统的定性研究。
目的:探讨非营利医疗保健系统中的用户如何感知、导航和参与组织的创新管理过程,并确定影响创新参与的障碍和促进因素。患者和方法:从2025年5月1日到2025年6月30日,在梅奥诊所进行了一项使用建构主义基础理论的定性研究。13个半结构化访谈由代表多个创新采用者类别的团队成员完成。访谈记录使用建构主义基础理论方法进行分析,包括开放编码、轴向编码和选择性编码,以确定与创新障碍和促进因素相关的重复模式。结果:专题分析确定了创新参与的六个主要障碍:路径分散、沟通孤立、资源有限、缺乏清晰度、文化惯性和领导不一致。五个主要的促进因素出现了:领导支持、指导、协作、认可和风险容忍。与会者强调了透明的创新途径、组织协调和心理安全在支持创新努力和推动创新理念走向实施方面的重要性。结论:大型非营利医疗保健系统的创新受到结构和文化因素的双重影响。研究结果表明,由领导参与、协作和资源可及性支持的形式化、透明的创新框架可以加强参与,改善创新过程的导航,并促进将想法转化为有意义的组织成果。
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
Mayo Clinic proceedings
Mayo Clinic proceedings 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
16.80
自引率
1.10%
发文量
383
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Mayo Clinic Proceedings is a premier peer-reviewed clinical journal in general medicine. Sponsored by Mayo Clinic, it is one of the most widely read and highly cited scientific publications for physicians. Since 1926, Mayo Clinic Proceedings has continuously published articles that focus on clinical medicine and support the professional and educational needs of its readers. The journal welcomes submissions from authors worldwide and includes Nobel-prize-winning research in its content. With an Impact Factor of 8.9, Mayo Clinic Proceedings is ranked #20 out of 167 journals in the Medicine, General and Internal category, placing it in the top 12% of these journals. It invites manuscripts on clinical and laboratory medicine, health care policy and economics, medical education and ethics, and related topics.
×
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