In the following post, D’Amore-McKim School of Business Assistant Professor of Management and Organizational Development Parker Ellen examines the impact that leaders with narcissistic tendencies can have on their employees.
Narcissism—referred to in organizational research as a personality disposition involving inflated self-views, self-focus, and self-love—has become a popular subject in work-related media outlets. This is perhaps due in part to the frequency with which employees must interact with narcissistic bosses, given that sub-clinical narcissism (i.e., those with narcissistic tendencies) has been found to facilitate emergence in organizational leadership roles.
In the following post, D’Amore-McKim School of Business Professor Timothy Hoff examines the benefits of strong doctor-patient relationships and what the weakening of those ties means for health care in general.
A version of this post was originally published on the Oxford University Press blog:
If there is a single profound thing that has occurred in health care over the past couple of decades, that has neither benefitted patients or the doctors who care for them, nor the health system as a whole, it is the fairly rapid deterioration of the physician-patient relationship as the centerpiece of effective, satisfying, and high quality health care delivery. Instead of building system improvements around strengthening the relational care between our best trained health care professionals and patients, many health care systems around the world have chosen to place their faith in technologies like electronic medical records, which surveys show makes the doctor’s ability to connect with the patient and spend time with them as an individual more challenging and frustrating. In addition, the industry’s growing corporate takeover of health care delivery, driven by large health systems, insurance plans, and hospitals place the health care organization, not the individual doctor, in front of the patient at every turn. As a result, patients become “consumers”, and the role of the doctor in being the patient’s trusted ally shrinks.
Amidst all the controversies of the Trump administration, we students of negotiations have been given a number of heretofore rare opportunities to observe and analyze actual negotiations that take place in the political world. We have many instances of seeing presidents negotiate in public, but little idea of how negotiations play out when these actors are not on stage. We have recently had the opportunity to compare the public part of a negotiation (“Mexico will pay for the wall”) with the actual negotiation that followed.
On August 4, 2017, The New York Times published the transcript of telephone conversations that took place earlier this year. The first transcript was of a conversation between President Trump and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. President Trump has stated many times in public that Mexico will pay for the wall. This strong public position has a number of purposes, some of which are to “anchor” the negotiation towards an extreme end and also to intimidate an opponent. By being so public with this anchor, the President has signaled his resoluteness, since it is hard to back down from publicly-stated positions without losing face, looking very weak, and causing future extreme anchors to be ignored.
In the following post, D’Amore-McKim School of Business Professor Timothy Hoff explains the impact of the changing payment landscape for healthcare professionals and how their task-heavy job roles are having a negative effect on worker happiness, increasing burnout, and creating new issues in the sphere.
From Modern Healthcare:
We live in challenging times for physicians, who are required to do things that are wearing them out and making them feel bad about their jobs.
Surveys showing large percentages of doctors burned out, dissatisfied with their work or regretting their career choice point to something deeply psychological that is happening to many doctors—something that should make all of us very concerned. Read more…