The objective of this work is to highlight issues that have a relationship with a relationship to cultural changes, followership, power, and globalization from the perspective of a medical health leader. In this description, the paper identifies three fundamental issues of health that have affected the US healthcare system, noting their effects on stakeholders. The paper also relates differences in global styles of leadership and their similarities within the ideals of transformational leadership. In relation to this second objective of the paper, the work further identifies and discusses three elements of diversity and culture on the modern health care organization. Lastly, the paper categorizes differences in global leadership in relation to the use of power, technology, and knowledge management, providing two approaches of leadership that could be useful in implementation of change.
The healthcare system is and will remain to be affected by unrelenting pressures that transform it. In the modern age, the internet allows the communication of patients from a global perspective concerning issues of healthcare. In addition, patients gain more education about staying well, diseases, their modes of prevention, and the available treatments. The era of telecommunication, additionally result in tele-health that continues to redefine the relationship between doctors and patients as well as the way in which diseases are managed. The emergence of globalization as a factor affecting the healthcare system in this century raises issues such as global consumerism, which is defined by an increased level of education by patients on what they need and the time they need it (Nash and Gremillion, 2004). There are also issues of global marketing, which is brought about by the fact that millions of the people around the world flock online sources to research what is good for them in terms of healthcare. There are also issues of global providership, which are developed to meet the need for global marketing of healthcare products and services. Other issues include global recruitment, regulatory implications, and others. The challenges such as those mentioned and others require that leaders remain alert to keep abreast with the changes. This means that leaders should struggle to keep a perspective of what the future will look like while they effect changes at present (Nash and Gremillion, 2004).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The healthcare environment is also transforming in such a way that the issue of power in leadership is gaining a completely new meaning. For instance, managers of the present day have to understand that their employees no longer to be bossed around. It could be the fact that management is also changing with technological advancement (Nash and Gremillion, 2004). If this is true, as literature reports, there is a growing level of adoption of styles of inclusive methods of management. In this approach, leaders in the healthcare system are not viewed as symbols of power anymore. Instead, as they conduct their conventional managerial functions, managers are required to perceive their staff as team players. It means that strategies of decision-making have now shifted to favor consensus through consultation than ordering stakeholders. In this new model, the leaders are supposed to mold the rest of staff to grow into leaders of their own, which is helpful in decision-making.
Followership is another factor of significance to the healthcare sector with an effect on the mode of management for contemporary leaders. In relation to this factor, it should be acknowledged that leaders are now struggling to make their staff to trust in them and show great willingness to adopt their policies (Dunn, 2002). Followership does not have the same meaning as traditional authority that leaders enjoyed in the past. Instead, managers are now struggling to motivate their employees to perceive them as one of them, people who are ready to help in times of need and consult during decision-making scenarios. In addition managers of the modern ear are supposed to be aware of the cultural changes in their field of practice. Of much significance in this trend is the need for healthcare managers to learn managing in cross-cultural settings. The issue of globalization has brought about workplace diversity that refers to a situation where the workplace has people from different backgrounds. managers are now being required to learn to manage in such environments if they have to be effective (Dunn, 2002).
The US healthcare system has mostly been affected by technological changes. The contemporary patient in the US is one who is more informed about their rights, the likely diagnoses, and the medications they are supposed to be prescribed among other issues. This scenario challenges the healthcare managers who have to strive to adopt to a system of leadership that will assure the patients that they are being handled using the best standards of care provisioned using the best technologies and human resources (Dunn, 2002). Another issue of critical significance to the medical system of the US is the cost of healthcare. For example, the high cost of healthcare insurance has attracted attention from the political, civil, and healthcare sectors. It is now being demanded by the public that the cost of healthcare be affordable to as many Americans as possible. Leaders in the healthcare system have been put under constant pressure to ensure their institutions offer the highest standards of healthcare at the most affordable price possible (Dunn, 2002).
The global leadership style can be argued to be having similarity with transformational leadership since both of them emphasize the need for consultative decision-making (Bass, 1997). In both approaches, managers are supposed to be aware and treat their staff as stakeholders or associates. It means that there is advocacy for equal treatment for all employees. In such both system, the followers are driven into viewing their leaders as role models. The leaders reciprocate this respect through motivating their followers to grow into effective managers of their duties. However, as much as the two approaches are similar in this sense, there is also a difference among them. While global leadership is occasioned by the trends in healthcare leadership around the world, transformational leadership has been in existence for a longer time, which means that it shares several similarities with other conventional styles of leadership. In specificity, global leadership has evolved because of the recent challenges brought about by globalization (Dunn, 2002). This system of management is founded on the need to accommodate modern challenges of leadership for healthcare leaders. It means that leaders in this global leadership system have to struggle to fit themselves to their followers since the circumstances of their leadership are occasioned from the side of the followers. However, in transformational leadership, the leaders strive to make their followers adopt what they do through providing guidance. It means that the circumstances of leadership come from the side of the leaders who are supposed to pull the followers to their side (Bass, 1997).
Global leadership style can be categorized based on the elements of power, knowledge management, and technology. It is needful to note that this system of leadership is formed in the changing dynamics of the workplace brought about globalization. Along this line of thought, it is therefore plausible to argue that global leadership requires leaders first to be tech savvy, which means that they have to be conversant with new and existing technologies (Dunn, 2002). For example, in this environment of leadership, leaders are required to understand the modes and methods of communication that is common among their followers. This explains why leaders are growing increasingly concerned with the usage of social media in their communication (Dunn, 2002). Using the same construct of globalization, leaders are supposed to have a low power distance between them and their followers. This attribute relates to the fact that the mode of leadership results from the demands of the followers as described previously. Lastly, global management is largely defined by communication sharing, which suggests that global leaders have to be effective information managers.
In conclusion, contemporary leaders in the healthcare system have to be abreast with the constant need to change occasioned by the forces of globalization. As this paper has demonstrated, leaders have to understand that transformational leadership is not all they need to manage their followers. A new approach to management has quickly gained track, and it has similarities with transformational management. However, the difference comes from the fact that while transformational leadership draws relevance from the initiative of the leader to attract followers, the same leaders are forced to adopt the demands of their followers. Therefore, the most efficient managers in this new scenario are those who are able to deal with challenges such as workplace diversity, technological development, and others that pose similar challenges.
References
Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional–transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries?. American psychologist , 52 (2), 130.
Dunn, R. (2002). Haimann's healthcare management . Health Administration Press.
Nash, M., & Gremillion, C. (2004). Globalization impacts the healthcare organization of the 21st century: demanding new ways to market product lines successfully. Nursing Administration Quarterly , 28 (2), 86-91.
