How well prepared are hospitals for future crises? Board members perceive their hospitals as resilient for acute crises.

Resilience is an organizational capacity in day-to-day practice and crisis situation performance. A one of a kind crisis for hospitals is the COVID-19 pandemic. The long duration and magnitude of this crisis offers the opportunity to gain insight into the complexity of crisis management and organizational resilience of hospitals. This interview study therefore explored the organizational resilience of Dutch hospitals during the first 14 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nine board members of nine Dutch hospitals were interviewed by means of a semi-structured interview that was built on thirteen indicators of organizational resilience. The results showed that board members considered their hospitals as resilient on almost all indicators. Their judgments varied about how prepared and ready for future crises they considered their hospital. According to board members, hospitals are mainly prepared for "acute" short-term crises, thanks to good crisis leadership, open communication and strong networks. A crisis as long as the COVID-19 pandemic was unprecedented and therefore more difficult to deal with. In between the infection waves, work processes were reflected upon to learn, anticipate and respond more smoothly to successive waves. However, the enduring nature of the COVD-19 crisis presented complex organizational challenges. Crisis operations were eventually scaled down and hospitals had to manage the crisis and regular care as two companies side by side. Each crisis manifests differently. Fostering trust in healthcare staff and allowing them to act autonomously during crises, while diligently monitoring external influences and potential future crises, are therefore paramount in developing organizational adaptive capacities.

The influence of non-state-owned shareholder governance on the governance level of state-owned enterprises--Based on the perspective of board resolution behavior and party organization governance.

With an increasing number of heterogeneous shareholders participating in corporate governance in reality, the assumption of shareholder homogeneity in agency theory is gradually relaxing in the modern field of corporate governance. The policy of mixed ownership reform in China provides empirical evidence for studying heterogeneous shareholder governance. To fully understand the governance effects of non-state shareholders, we employ the ownership proportion held by non-state shareholders among the top ten shareholders and the appointment of directors as measures for non-state shareholder governance. Using a panel fixed-effect model from the perspective of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) party organizations, we examine the impact of non-state shareholder governance on the governance level of SOEs. The study reveals that non-state shareholder governance positively affects the governance level of SOEs, with board resolutions playing a crucial role in this relationship. When party members serve as directors, the governance effect of non-state shareholders is more significant. Based on the aforementioned research findings, we recommend further refining corporate governance measures for SOEs within the context of SOE reforms. It is advisable to optimize the party organizational governance structure and leverage the synergistic effects of non-state shareholder governance and party organizational governance. Advancing reforms along the Pareto improvement path will contribute to establishing a distinctive corporate governance system for Chinese SOEs.

Ethical patient engagement in healthcare governance.

Health leaders are faced with a lack of public trust in healthcare governance. This waning trust relationship was further solidified through the pandemic. Improving the relationship between health organizations and the community/citizens/patient partners is a moral imperative of which ethical governance is a significant factor. This article will structure the ethical analysis of patient partners in governance through reviewing who we are, how we function, and what we do on governance boards. Taking an ethical approach will enable the promise of the value and impact of the patient partner to be actualized. Ethical governance that recognizes the significant contributions and value of engaged patient partners can be achieved and may be one of the significant levers required to transform healthcare.

Gender board diversity across Europe throughout four decades.

We present a Gender Board Diversity Dataset (GBDD), which provides a cross-country perspective on women in management and supervisory boards that spans between 1985 and 2020. The data covers 43 European countries and accounts for private companies in addition to the stock-listed ones. GBBD was created using firm-level Orbis data. Our measures are based on a sample of more than 28 million unique firms observed for nearly seven years on average and reporting data about nearly 59 million individuals on management and supervisory boards. We provide the measures at the level of industry, country and year (firm-level data is proprietary). We provide three measures. The first is the share of women among all board members in a given industry, country, and year. The second one is the average of the shares of women across firms in a given industry, country and year. We also provide a new measure: the share of firms in a given industry, country and year which report no single woman on their board(s).

Engaging Governance in Workforce Strategy and Performance.

This column is a call to action for health care leaders to ensure that their governing boards make workforce an important part of their governance responsibility and oversight. Health care leaders need to take an active role in educating their governing board, identifying and monitoring appropriate workforce metrics, and engaging the board in developing and implementing a workforce plan. Workforce development is an important leadership competency and essential to today's health care organizations success.

Analysis of Race and Ethnicity Among United States Medical Board Leadership.

Background: The inequitable representation of women and members of racial and ethnic minority groups in leadership positions within academic medicine is an ongoing challenge with practical and realistic solutions. The purpose of this study was to assess the race and ethnicity of individuals in leadership positions among the 24 Member Boards of Directors (Boards) of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the race and ethnicity patterns for individuals holding leadership positions among the 24 Boards of the ABMS as of March 1, 2022. Two independent coders with 100% concordance recorded race and ethnicity using online biographies and photographs. Percentages were compared to the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) 2018 data reports. Results: Among 449 director positions, 415 (92.4%) were physicians. Within the physician subset, 12.3% (51/415) Asian, 8.2% (34/415) Black, and 3.4% (14/415) Hispanic individuals were identified. Women who are members of racial and ethnic minority groups have less representation than men of the same race. Of 24 Boards, 37.5% (9/24) had no Asian women, 50.0% (12/24) had no Black women, and 75.0% (18/24) had no Hispanic women. White physicians were overrepresented on 14 of 21 (66.7%) Boards compared to the proportion of active White physicians or White individuals in the United States general population. Conclusion: Disparities exist for members of racial and ethnic minority groups, particularly women from these groups. As a leader in academic medicine, the ABMS should ensure its Boards are diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity. Diverse groups often contribute unique insights that support medical education, advance science, and improve clinical care.

Stock price crash risk and military connected board: Evidence from Thailand.

Based on the agency and stakeholder theories, effective boards, acting as an internal governance mechanism, reduce agency costs. This paper asks whether military connected boards represent a good governance tool by exploring how military connected boards affect stock price crash risk. Using instrumental variable analysis, we document that firms with military connected boards have lower risk of stock price crashes. Our findings are unlikely to have endogeneity concerns and shed light on the role of military connected boards as an effective internal governance tool. Consistent with the conservatism hypothesis and stakeholder theory, by being transparent about firm-specific bad news, military connected boards could effectively monitor managers to ensure they act on all stakeholders' interests.

Aligning Healthcare's Mission With Corporate Social Responsibility Action.

Amid many challenges, health systems and hospitals are striving to improve the health of their communities with varying degrees of commitment. While many have recognized the importance of the social determinants of health, most have not responded aggressively to the global climate crisis that is sickening and killing millions of people worldwide-and getting worse. As the largest healthcare provider in New York, Northwell Health is committed to keeping our communities well in the most socially responsible way. That means engaging with partners to enhance well-being, expand access to equitable care, and take environmental responsibility. Healthcare organizations have a special obligation to broaden their efforts to prevent further damage to the planet and limit the human toll of that damage. For this to happen, their governing boards must support tangible environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategies and put in place the administrative structures for their C-suites that are necessary to ensure compliance. At Northwell Health, governance is the engine that drives accountability for ESG.