Hasil (
Bahasa Indonesia) 1:
[Salinan]Disalin!
Our empirical investigation places primary emphasis on normative rather than cognitive or regulative legitimacy for both substantive and practical reasons. From a substantive view point, the healthcare field in the U.S. has long been subject to strong professional norms, as evidenced by the power of organizations such as the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Hospital Association (AHA). In areas such as healthcare, where outcomes are often uncertain and difficult to assess, professional and industry trade associations develop "to collectively create and maintain institutional legitimating devices" that enhance public trust (Van de Ven and Garud, 1989: 211). These associations engage in regular and systematic efforts to evaluate the conformity of hospital organizations to industrywide professional standards and to provide assurance to the public that such matters receive careful scrutiny. The results of such evaluations are significant for the organization being evaluated: hospitals receiving favorable evaluations are likely to display them publicly to relevant audiences; conversely, the loss of accreditation is widely publicized in local or even national media, On the practical side, cognitive legitimacy at the population level (which we evaluate empirically) is well established by thetime of our study: hospitals are a taken for granted arrangement for providing healthcare services, and individual organizations rarely depart from the conventional format. There exist many sources of regulative authority over hospitals, including common law (negligence and liability, duties and responsibilities of corporate officials, the hospital's contractual agreements), labor law, personnel licensure, monitoring of financial operations, hospital licensure, and Medicaid certification (see Somers, 1969). Many of these especially licensure and certificationtend to be closely aligned with normative control systems.
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
