Provide names of other journalists involved.
Geri Amori, PhD, ARM, CPHRM
List date(s) this work was published or aired.
23-Feb-11
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
In recent years healthcare has tackled the issue of disruptive providers in a frontal, forward approach. Organizations have set guidelines, policies and standards of behavior in conjunction with behavioral approaches to address overt behaviors that affect patient safety. Risk managers are aware, however, that equally; if not more dangerous to the care of patients is a form of disruptive behavior that is subtle, and demonstrated by individuals throughout the ranks from housekeepers to C-Suite Administrators. It is a form of bullying that we have identified as Insidious Intimidation in Healthcare. Insidious intimidation takes many forms from passive aggressive types of behavior that may or may not have a specific target to negative attitudes, refusal to cooperate with other people in the organization, to self-preservative behaviors such as gossip, withholding information, or subtle discrimination. These behaviors may have cultural, psychological, or gender issues at their core, but they have the same result. Whether a specific behavior results in demoralization of staff, restraint of information flow, or simply “bad vibes”, it affects the environment in which patients receive care and deters effective communication flow that is needed for safety. The subtle nature of these behaviors make them difficult to isolate, risky to approach with the individual, and essential to address for the organization.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
In addition to the experience of the authors working in environments and with this type of behavior, essential research on disruptive behavior, bullying, and intimidation were conducted through normal online channels.
Explain types of human sources used.
Human sources were the authors own experiences in the fields and discussions with colleagues about the pervasiveness of the problem.
Results:
Many people have approached both the authors to discuss the article and its relevance to their own organizations and experiences. The approaches recommended by the authors have been applied in total or in part in organizations.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No one has challenged the accuracy. To the contrary, many people have approached us to say that we have accurately depicted a problem about which they were aware but had not seen addressed.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
There is much to be discovered in the similarity of our experiences. When becoming aware of a topic that has pervasive impact, it is essential to look outside of your field to what has been explored by others. The co-authors of this article have differing perspective on human behavior. These differences in approach enrich their combined perspective of the issue. Every human problem has three components: the psychological motivation, its behavioral demonstration, and the enabling systemic culture. By taking a bifurcated (individual plus systems) line of attack to problem analysis and approach to address issues human, a more complete picture will emerge.