stakeholders model
TRANSCRIPT
INTRODUCTION
This study uses the Stakeholders Model to evaluate the management of the
SARS outbreak in Hong Kong in 2003. Stakeholders are identified from the Hospital
Authority Head Office Senior Management’s perspective. Comparisons of the
performance of similar authority in Canada and Singapore in engaging their
stakeholders in the SARS outbreak management have been made where appropriate,
with the objectives to learn from the common mistakes and good performance of
others, and make recommendations for management of future outbreaks of similar
nature.
STAKEHOLDERS MODEL
Stakeholders Theory
Stakeholders are those individuals or groups who depend on the organization to
fulfill their own goals and on whom, in turn, the organization depends. In the other
words, any constituency in the environment that is affected by an organization’s
decisions and policies and that can influence the organization. Influence is likely to
occur only because individuals share expectations with others by being a part of a
stakeholder group. Individuals tend to identify themselves with the aims and ideals of
stakeholder groups, which may occur within departments, geographical locations,
different levels in the hierarchy, etc. Also important are external stakeholders of the
organization, typically financial institutions, customers, suppliers, shareholders and
unions. They may seek to influence company strategy through their links with
internal stakeholders. For example, customers may pressurize sales managers to
1
represent their interests within the company. Even if external stakeholders are
passive, they may represent real constraints on the development of new strategies.
Individuals may belong to more than one stakeholder group and stakeholder
groups will ‘line up’ differently depending on the issue or strategy in hand. For
example, marketing and production departments might be united in the face of
proposals to drop certain product lines, whilst being in fierce opposition regarding
plans to buy in new items to the product range. Often it is specific strategies that
trigger off the formation of stakeholder groups. For these reasons, the stakeholder
concept is valuable when trying to understand the political context within which
specific strategic developments would take place (Johnson & Scholes, 2002).
Identifying the stakeholders
An organization’s mission and objectives need to be developed bearing in mind
two sets of interests:
1. the interests of those who have to carry them out e.g. the managers and employers
- Internal stakeholders;
2. the interests of those who have a stake in the outcome e.g. the shareholders,
government, customers, suppliers and other interested parties - External
stakeholders
Together these groups form the stakeholders – the individuals and groups who
have an interest in the organization and may therefore wish to influence its purpose,
mission and objectives.
The organization’s mission may take months of debate and consultation within
the organization. When its implications are clearly set out for the directors, managers
2
and employees, they may not necessarily accept the mission without question: there
may be objections as it is realized that individuals will have to work harder, undertake
new tasks, or face the prospect of leaving the company. The individuals and groups
affected may want to debate the matter further. Such individuals and groups have a
stakeholding in the organization and therefore wish to influence its mission.
This concept of stakeholding extends those working in the organization.
Shareholders in a public company, banks which have loaned the organization money,
governments concerned about employment, investment and trade may also have
legitimate stakeholdings in the company. Customers and suppliers will also have an
interest in the organization. They may be informal, such as government involvement
in a private company, or formal, such as through a shareholding in the company. All
can be expected to be interested in and possibly wish to influence the future direction
of the organization (Lynch, 2003).
Inputs to the development of the company mission:
Internal Stakeholders
Executive officers
Board of directors
Stockholders
Employees
Stakeholder analysis
External Stakeholders
Customers
Suppliers
Creditors
Governments
Unions
Competitors
General public
Company
Mission
3
Stakeholder analysis provides a link between internal analysis and external
analysis. Internal stakeholders are the management, the different departments within
the organization and its employees. The needs, wants and motivating factors for each
of these groups are different. What may please management could cause unease
among the workforce. On their own, no one group is able to completely influence the
direction and activities of the organization. There are groups, however, who posses
greater power than others. Stakeholder analysis seeks to identify these.
External stakeholders cannot simply be identified or listed; they differ between
organizations and industries. However, external stakeholders may be grouped into
segments which are frequently involved in the organization’s activities: owners
(shareholders), suppliers, customers and financiers. Other groups which could also
have stakeholder status for an organization are the government (central and local),
guilds and associations, and pressure groups who may or may not have an interest in
the success of an organization with its present or future activities (Cook &
Farqularson, 1998).
There are various ways in which stakeholder analysis is performed to measurer
the relative power of different groups and individuals. These techniques typically
utilize a mapping or matrix approach.
1. Relative power matrix - The relative interests on the part of each group in the
organization’s proposed activity are given numerical values. The total for each
group is then analyzed to assess their power.
2. Power/interest matrix - The power/interest matrix seeks to describe the political
context within which an individual strategy would be pursued by classifying
stakeholders in relation to the power they hold and the extent to which they are
4
likely to show interest in supporting or opposing a particular strategy.
The matrix indicates the type of relationship which organizations typically might
establish with stakeholder groups in the different quadrants.
Level of Interest
Power
Low High
Low A Minimal effort B Keep informed
High C Keep satisfied D Key players
Source: Adapted from A. Mendelow, Proceedings of the Second International
Conference on Information Systems, Cambridge, MA, 1991.
Clearly, the acceptability of strategies to key players (segment D) is of major
importance. Often the most difficult issues relate to stakeholders in segment C
(institutional shareholders often fall into this category). Although these stakeholders
might, in general, be relatively passive, a disastrous situation can arise when their
level of interest is underrated and they suddenly reposition to Segment D and frustrate
the adoption of a new strategy. A view might be taken that it is a responsibility of
strategists or managers to raise the level of interest of powerful stakeholders (such as
institutional shareholders), so that they can better fulfill their expected role within the
corporate governance framework. Also, this could be concerned with how non-
executive directors could be assisted in fulfilling their role, say, through food
information and briefing.
Similarly, organizations might address the expectations of stakeholders in
segment B through information – for example, to community groups. These
stakeholders can be crucially important “allies’ in influencing the attitudes of more
5
powerful stakeholders: for example, through lobbying.
Stakeholder mapping might help in understanding better some of the following
issues:
1. Whether the levels of interest and power of stakeholders properly reflect the
corporate governance framework within which the organization is operating, as
in the examples above (non-executive directors, community groups).
2. Who are likely to be the key blockers and facilitators of a strategy and how this
could be responded to – for example, in terms of education or persuasion?
3. Whether organizations should seek to reposition certain stakeholders. This could
be to lessen the influence of a key player or, in certain instances, to ensure that
there are more key players who will champion the strategy (this is often critical
in the public sector context).
4. The extent to which stakeholders may need to be assisted or encouraged to
maintain their level of interest or power. For example, public ‘endorsement’ by
powerful suppliers or customers may be critical to the success of a strategy.
Equally, it may necessary to discourage some stakeholders from repositioning
themselves. This is what is meant by keep satisfied in relation to stakeholders in
segment C, and to a lesser extent keep informed for those in segment B (Johnson
& Scholes, 2002).
Stakeholder Relationship Management
Stakeholder relationships management is important as it can lead to other
organizational outcomes such as improved predictability of environmental changes,
more successful, innovations, greater degrees of trust among stakeholders, and greater
organizational flexibility to reduce the impact of change. In turn it affects the
organizational performance to a higher extent.
6
Stakeholder relationships can be managed in four steps. The first step is
identifying who the organization’s stakeholders. The second step is for managers to
determine what particular interests or concerns these stakeholders might have –
product quality, financial issues, safety of working conditions, environmental
protection, and so forth. Next managers must decide how critical each stakeholder is
to the organization’s decisions and actions. The final step is determining what
specific approach they should use to manage the external stakeholder relationships.
This decision depends on how critical the external stakeholder is to the organization
and how uncertain the environment is. The more critical the stakeholder and the more
uncertain the environment, the more that managers need to rely on establishing
explicit stakeholder partnerships.
The various approaches to managing stakeholder Relationships:
Stakeholder Importance
Environmental
Uncertainty
Critically
Importance
Important
but Not Critical
High
Uncertainty
Stakeholder
Partnerships
Boundary
Spanning
Low
Uncertainty
Stakeholder
Management
Scanning and
Monitoring the
Environment
When external stakeholders are important but not critical and environmental
uncertainty is low, managers usually rely on simply scanning and monitoring the
environment for trends and forces that may be changing. In this situation, it’s not
necessary for managers to take specific actions to manage stakeholders. They just
need to stay informed about what’s happening with them, what concerns they might
7
have, and whether these concerns are changing.
When the stakeholder is important but not critical and environmental uncertainty
is high, managers need to be more proactive in their efforts to manage the stakeholder
relationships. They can do this by using boundary spanning, which involves
interacting in more specific ways with various external stakeholders to gather and
disseminate important information. In boundary spanning, organizational members
move freely between the organization and external stakeholders. The boundaries of
the organization become more flexile and permeable. Boundary spanners are often
said to have their feet in multiple settings – that is, they span the organizational
boundaries. For instance, individuals who interact day in and day out with external
stakeholders as they do their jobs – such as a salesperson for pharmaceutical company
who interacts with doctors and health care professionals, a public relations manager
who talks with newspaper and television reporters – would establish closer and more
explicit relationships with the various stakeholders. It’s a step beyond just simply
scanning and monitoring the environment because boundary spanners actively interact
with stakeholders as they gather and disseminate information.
When the stakeholder is critical and environmental uncertainty is low, managers
can use more direct stakeholder management efforts such as conducting customer
marketing research, encouraging competition among suppliers, establishing
governmental relations departments or lobbying efforts, initiating public relations
connections with public pressure groups, and so forth.
Finally, when the stakeholder is critical and environmental uncertainty is high,
managers should use stakeholder partnerships, which are proactive arrangements
between an organization and a stakeholder to pursue common goals. These types of
partnering activities allow organizations to build bridges – organization-supplier,
organization-customer, organization-local communities, organization-competitor, and
8
so forth – to their stakeholders. Stakeholder partnerships involve significant levels of
commitment among the partners to be more interdependent rather than independent
(Robbins & Coulter, 2002).
Conflicts of Interests/ Expectations amongst stakeholders
The key issue with regard to stakeholders is that the organization needs to take
them into account in formulating its mission and objectives. If it does not, they may
object and cause real problems for the organization. Since the interests/ expectations
of stakeholder groups will differ, it is quite normal for conflict to exist regarding the
importance or desirability of many aspects of strategy.
The typical stakeholder expectations include the conflicts between growth and
profitability; growth and control/ independence; cost efficiency and jobs; volume/
mass provision and quality/ specialization; and the problems of sub-optimization,
where the development of one part of an organization may be at the expense of
another (Lynch, 2003).
Consequently, the organization will need to resolve which stakeholders have
priority: stakeholder power needs to be analyzed.
Analyzing and Applying Stakeholder Power
Power is the ability of individuals or groups to persuade induce or coerce others
into following certain courses of action. Sources of power within organizations are
hierarchy (formal power) e.g. autocratic decision making, influence (informal power)
e.g. charismatic leadership, control of strategic resources e.g. strategic products,
possession of knowledge and skills e.g. computer specialists, control of the
environment e.g. negotiating skills and involvement in strategy implementation e.g.
by exercising discretion. For external stakeholders, the sources of power are control
of strategic resources e.g. materials, involvement in strategy implementation e.g.
9
distribution outlets, possession of knowledge (skills) e.g. subcontractors and through
internal links e.g. informal influence.
As part of the analysis stakeholder power, some explicit investigation needs to be
undertaken of the sanctions available against specific stakeholder groups. These
might be used to ensure that, which conflict exists between stakeholder groups, some
resolution is achieved. Such analysis may be the beginning of a bargaining process
between the various groups. This is likely to involve compromise, depending on the
power of groups of stakeholders and their willingness to agree. It may also involve
the use of sanctions to bring pressure to bear on particularly difficult groups. The
following are the six major steps of stakeholders power study:
1. Identify the major stakeholders.
2. Establish their interests and claims on the organization, especially as new strategy
initiatives are developed.
3. Determine the degree of power that each group holds through its ability to force or
influence change as new strategies are developed.
4. Development of mission, objectives and strategy, possibly prioritized to minimize
power clashes.
5. Consider how to divert trouble before it starts, possibly by negotiating with key
groups.
6. Identify the sanctions available and, if necessary, apply them to ensure that the
purpose is formulated and any compromise reached (Lynch, 2003).
To summarize, stakeholding is an integral part of the different sectors of the
economy and a part of risk management. Stakeholding creates potential business links
worth encouraging and taking up. If stakeholding is not handled suitably, it may have
the power to bring an organization to its knees and causes a lot of damages to the
organization.
10
In the following sections, the stakeholders of the Hospital Authority (HA) in
managing the SARS outbreak are identified from the perspectives of the Senior
Executives in the Head Office (HO). The performance of the HAHO in engaging the
various stakeholders in managing the SARS outbreak are evaluated. References to
overseas practice in Canada and Singapore are made where appropriate and how the
stakeholders can be better engaged in future outbreak of similar nature are
recommended.
STAKEHOLDERS OF THE HAHO SENIOR MANAGEMENT
The proper containment and control of the outbreak of the fatal infectious disease
SARS was the prime objective of the HAHO. It was also the objectives of all involved
in the public health management system including the Health, Welfare and Food
Bureau, the Department of Health, the HA Board, the Hospital Governing Committees
and the Cluster Management, the private health sector including the private hospitals,
and general practitioners. It is also of great concerns to the insurance companies; the
private and voluntary sectors including the suppliers, the nursing homes and the
academic and research professionals, the health care workers directly involved in the
frontline to combat the deadly disease and their professional associations and unions
and the patients whether or not contracted the SARS. Last but not least would be the
media and the public at large. All of them are stakeholders to HAHO in the SARS
outbreak management.
Health, Welfare and Food Bureau (HWFB)
The HWFB is the policy bureau which has the overall policy responsibility for
all matters relating to health. It is supposed to match out the strategy for managing
11
and controlling the epidemic, co-ordinate the efforts in the health sector to combat the
disease. It also oversees Hong Kong’s emergency response. It monitors the
performance of HA and at the same time controls and approves funding for HA. With
the above mentioned high interests and high power over the public health policies and
the performance of HA, the HWFB is definitely one of the most important key players
amongst the various stakeholders of the HAHO Senior Management according to the
stakeholders interest / power mapping theory.
Department of Health (DH)
The DH is the Government’s Health Advisor and the executive arm of the
government in the health legislation and policy. It is also the health advocate of the
community. During the SARS epidemic, it liaised with HA on public health functions
of disease surveillance, contact tracing and collaborated with World Health
Organization (WHO) and international health agencies and authorities in giving
information and communicating warning of the highly communicable SARS disease.
With the high interests and high power in the public health system, the DH is another
key player to the HAHO Senior Management to be heavily and tactfully engaged in
order to combat the SARS and control the outbreak effectively.
However, before and during the SARS epidemic last year, there has been an
absence of a formal framework of responsibility reporting between the HA and the
HWFB. Communication and decision making between HA, HWFB and DH was
basically relied on the historical informal system. There were no specific rules for
engagement of the stakeholders. The chain of command was not clear which had
resulted in poor decisions and confusions at all levels.
12
Similar problems were experienced in Ontario, Canada. There were three levels
of government, namely the federal level, the provincial level and the local / territorial
level who all have legislative authority over health issues. They all have jurisdictions
governing emergencies which cover infectious diseases, epidemics and public health
threats. During the SARS period, the jurisdiction between the federal, provincial and
territorial governments were mixed. There was uncertainty about federal powers in
public health. The mechanism for collaborative decision making was weak and there
was no or limited data sharing across government to enable efficient and effective
contact tracing and disease surveillance. The Provincial Operations Centre (POC) for
Emergency Response was co-chaired by the Ontario’s Commissioner of Public Safety
and Security and the Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer and Commissioner of Public
Health. Tensions existed between the two co-chairs of the POC with differing
management styles. Matters were further complicated as other branches of the Health
Canada helped to manage the interactions with hospitals, long-term care facilities,
physicians, and elements of the health services system. Control, command and
leadership at the municipal, provincial and ultimately national levels were unclear.
Recommendations on engaging the HWFB and DH
To address the issues, it is recommended that the HA, HWFB and DH should
reach prior agreement on the clear delineation of roles, responsibilities, accountability
and authority respectively. The authority and responsibilities of each party should be
clearly understood and adhered to by all parties.
The benefits of a single authority engaged all the relevant parties of the public
health management structure with clear delineation of role in one single command
was evidenced by effectiveness of the Singapore experience of the Task Force set up
13
and chaired by the Director of Medical Services including experts from the Ministry
of Health and hospital responsible for the overall management of the epidemic during
the SARS period.
The National Advisory Committee (NAC) on SARS and Public Health,
established by the Canadian Government in May 2003 to provide a “third party
assessment of current public health efforts and lessons learned for ongoing and future
infectious disease control” also recommended that “the Government of Canada should
move promptly to establish a Canadian Agency for Public Health, a legislated service
agency, and give it the appropriate and consolidated authorities necessary to provide
leadership and action on public health matters, such as national disease outbreaks and
emergencies, with or without additional authorities regarding national disease
surveillance capacity.”
The HA Board
Amongst the various stakeholders that faced by the HAHO Senior Management,
the HA Board is another key play who have high interests and high authority on
HAHO. The HA Board have statutory governance authority and responsibilities on
HA. The Board should provide oversight and strategic direction to HA at all times.
The role should be even more prominent in crisis situation and it should also functions
faster with greater intensity.
However, a streamlined structure to enable the HA Board to perform the
governance function and to provide strategic directions during crisis situation is
absent. The six functional committees on planning, medical services development,
human resources, support services development, finance and audit together with the
standing committee on public complaints could not provide timely and advice in the
14
crisis situation. The Board nor the Committees were well informed of the HA
situation though the Chairman of the Board was heavily involved in the HA
Operation.
Recommendations to engage the HA Board
The role of the HA Board in governance in respect of its position and dealing
with the HAHO Senior Management should be clearly defined. The respective roles
of the HA Board, the HA Chairman and the HA Chief Executive should be clearly
delineated with respect to responsibility, authority and accountability. While it is
unrealistic and inefficient to involve the whole HA Board on every urgent decision in
combating the SARS, a set of principles to guide the HA Board and HAHO Senior
Management to determine when to involve the Board Chairman and members in the
process should be developed. A “Task Force” with clear mandate from the Board
should be established to take up full responsibility for the board during the crisis
while a reporting mechanism should be established to kept other Board Members well
informed of the progress in the war against the epidemics.
The Hospital Governing Committees
With the set up of the Hospital Authority, Hospital Governing Committees
(HGC) for 35 public hospitals were also set up. The HGCs have statutory governing
authority on the running and operations of the hospitals. However, in practice, the
HGCs are largely advisory as members are all volunteers. The members would not
have much interest and time in the hospital management or SARS management in the
crisis situation. The ambiguity in roles and purposes of the HGCs were further
intensified with the development of the Cluster Management Structure with hospital
15
management authority rest with the Cluster Chief Executive.
Recommendations on engaging the HGCs
According to the power interest mapping principle under the stakeholders model,
the HGCs with high power but low interests should still be kept informed of the
situation, in particular, any important decision of closure of the A&E service or even
the closure of the whole hospital. It would be good to have a clear agreement on the
role of the HGC in HA’s new Cluster Management Structure in particular during a
crisis situation. Communication and reporting mechanism should be established to
maintain a smooth information flow to engage their full support on every important
decision made on the operations of any particular hospital.
Cluster Management (Cluster Chief Executives)
The Cluster Chief Executives (CCEs) are one of the most important key players
amongst the various stakeholders faced by the HAHO Senior Management. They are
part of the HAHO Senior Management Team on one hand but on the other hand, they
are the direct management of the staff, facilities, and resources in hospital in
providing the hospital services to patients and combating the epidemic. There may be
conflict of interests between the Cluster objectives to contain the epidemic in the
Cluster level by refusing to accept patients transferred from other clusters or reluctant
to render support or deploying staff to other clusters to help out. Confused /
contradictory messages may be coming HAHO and clusters and caused confusions to
the frontline. The conflicts of interests might also lead to inefficient decision making
in the central and ineffective implementation in the cluster level. Views from the
frontline were not feedback to the senior management at HAHO.
16
Recommendations on engaging the CCEs and Cluster Management
To address the issues, a clear command and control structure i.e. the “war
cabinet” to manage the outbreak or epidemic should be set up at the HAHO level
being oversight by the HA Board or its Task Force. Contingency plans should be
formulated and well trialed out during peacetime. Centralized functions during crisis
situation should be clearly identified with dedicated manpower, properly trained, to be
mobilized in a short notice. During the crisis situation, the “War Cabinet” would take
up overall control and responsibilities on all actions in combating the SARS or
epidemic.
Private Hospitals
In the stakeholders’ mapping, the interests of the private hospitals to SARS are
high but their powers to SARS are low, so keeping informing the private hospitals is
the good way for the Hospital Authority and the government to do during the SARS
period.
The interest of private hospital is quite clear. The main concern in any time is to
make the profit and generate enough cash flow for the continuing operation. By
gaining the sufficient cash net inflow to the private hospitals, they can achieve their
general missions, visions and objectives of providing better quality of medical
services and maintain the high standard of medical care, hygiene, medical
environment safety and other statutory requirements. During SARS period, the focus
of their interest was concentrated on whether the SARS incident could affect their
transactions. SARS is a highly infectious disease, during the SARS period, there was
no 100% accurate and instant clinical testing method for verifying the SARS cases.
17
So, the administration teams of private hospital concerned greatly on the liability of
compensation on their employee and patients being infected by SARS in their
hospitals. In the same time, as the personal protection supplies, e.g. masks and gowns,
consumed quickly, there was a risk of using up all protection supplies. The private
hospitals may need to make the decision of the temporary closure of operation due to
lack of protection supplies to the employee working in the high-risk area, e.g.
Intensive Care Unit. Unfortunately, there were no governmental departments or
Hospital Authority to coordinate the procurement of the medical protection supplies
for the private hospitals. The private hospitals did not jointly acquire the medical
protection supplies, they also competed one another to grab the limited medical
protection supplies from the vendors. It showed the lack of cooperation among the
private hospitals, the Private Hospital Association was too loose to encourage the
cooperation of its members.
As the SARS frightened the general public, the patients were very worried to be
infected when they visited the hospitals. The lack of confidence leaded to great drops
in all kinds of non-emergency inpatient, outpatient cases and minor surgeries, but
there is a significant increase in obstetric cases as the mothers thought delivering their
babies in the private hospitals was safer than in the public hospitals. In order to
protect their vulnerable business, the private hospitals avoid admitting any SARS
suspected cases through screening the visiting patients in the very beginning. Also,
they request the Hospital Authority to accept all transfer of SARS suspected cases.
The private hospitals thought that the guidelines provided by the Department of
Health and Hospital Authority are very vague and there were very few
communication, so the private hospitals regularly ask for the latest guidelines and the
information of SARS from the HA and DH.
18
The private hospitals are recommended to enhance their coordination among
themselves through the Private Hospital Association on jointly acquiring the medical
supplies and medicine, and set up a Crisis Coordination Team under the Private
Hospital Association to set up a surge capacity for medical supplies and workforce for
their members to satisfy the instant need during the crisis period. Canada has similar
established platform for coordinating the surge capacity: Health Emergency Response
Team (HERT) to mobilize select groups of skilled personnel, such as quarantine
officers and nurses. Also, it addresses the specific requirement of a health emergency
for an epidemic or outbreak of infectious diseases. Although the private hospitals are
competitors one another, the cooperation of procurement can increase their bargaining
power for lower cost of medical supplies and medicine, and maximize their capacity
and efficiency to solve the instant outbreak.
Private Practitioners
In the stakeholders’ mapping, the interests of the private practitioners, or called
GPs, to SARS are high but their powers to SARS are low, so the Hospital Authority
and Department of Health should keep informing the private practitioners on the
SARS matters in order to deal with that kind of stakeholders well.
The private practitioners are vulnerable business in the SARS period. When a
private practitioner in a clinic was infected with SARS during the early days in SARS
period and spread to his patient, the transaction of the GPs dropped significantly. They
were in dilemma on treating the visiting patients. As the symptoms of SARS are quite
similar to other common low-risk infectious diseases in the community, they really
wanted more patients to visit their clinics but they did not know how to verify the
19
SARS cases and whether their protective gowns and masks could protect them from
being infected by their visiting patients. During SARS, the guideline provided by
Department of Health was not clear enough. They seemed to be neglected and so they
demanded Department of Health could provide the latest information of SARS and
the suspected cases and clear referral guideline and infection control guideline as well.
Also, they are quite trivial to compete with other hospitals and group medical
practices to acquire the medical protective supplies, so they demand Department of
Health, HA or other government departments to coordinate the supplies of PPE for all
private practices
In order to better serve that kind of stakeholders, the Department of Health
should set up a information platform (IS system) for the private practices to
communicate and share the information for patient history, latest referral and infection
control guidelines for SARS and other highly infectious diseases. Also, an electronic
infectious disease reporting platform, similar to the information system set up in
Canada, should be established and widely used among all private practices for better
alerting in crisis management when one of the GPs recognises the suspected case of
an infectious disease in the community. For the GPs, they should contribute their
patients’ histories to the database and let those information easily acquired by public
and private practices under the agreement of the patients each time, in order to
balance the transparency of medical information for medical purpose and the
individual privacy enjoyed under the current common law in Hong Kong.
Insurance Companies
In the stakeholders’ mapping, the powers of insurance companies to SARS
20
incident are low, but interests of the insurance companies to SARS incident varied in
two different period, during SARS and after SARS, which is low and high
respectively. So, minimal effort should be put on the insurance companies during the
SARS period. After SARS period, the Hospital Authority and Department of Health
should keep informing the insurance companies in order to deal with that kind of
stakeholders well.
The insurance companies concern all matters affecting their profitability,
especially the risk emergent during the crisis. In order to secure their profit, they use
certain kinds of estimation by actuarial science to balance the risk control and rewards
from competitive insurance premium. After SARS period, there was a trend in
increasing claim for the compensation for the damages relating to infectious diseases
from the employees and the patients under the insurance plan of the employers,
especially hospitals. So, they decided to avoid facing unpredictable risk for the claim
of employee and third party compensation due to infectious diseases by restricting the
coverage of their medical insurance provided to the employers. Upon renewal of
insurance plan for the medical practices, they removed the terms for covering the
employees and third-party medical compensation relating to infectious diseases.
Moreover, they raised the insurance premium to Hospital Authority and private
hospitals by fewer extent and 4 to 6 times respectively.
So, in order to show the social responsibility of the whole insurance field to the
society of Hong Kong, they should lower the premium as the coverage of infectious
diseases is excluded. Higher premiums charged by the insurance companies in the
renewed contracts for less coverage are not sensible. Also, the government should set
up an independent corporation like Hong Kong Mortgage Corporation Limited to
coordinate all kinds of medical employee compensation insurance to develop a large
21
pool and reduce the concentration risk faced by the individual insurance companies,
especially for those providing insurance plan only to private hospitals. After collecting
the large pool of medical insurance plans, the independent corporation can resell those
employee insurance plans to the insurance companies and receive small percentage of
charges from the insurance companies for maintaining the operation of that
corporation.
Health Care Workers (HCW)
HCW are with high level of interest and high power. They are the key players
in managing the SARS outbreaks. It is because SARS threatens their lives as well as
the lives of their families. The fighting against the disease is mainly relied on
them. If they joint together to refuse to work or ‘work-to-regulation’, the whole
health care system will be paralyzed. In confronting SARS such a new, unknown
origin and cause, and behaved differently from anything seen before, and with no
effective treatment to cure, HCW fear of being infected of SARS or infecting their
families. They are also afraid of being discriminated. Some are afraid of to go to
work in hospitals and to care for SARS patients. Some also afraid to associate with
other HCW, or even spouses of health care workers, particularly those from SARS
units. They also linger resentment of colleagues who might not have contributed what
was expected. Some feel helpless, angry and guilty. This fear was further
engendered both by the sensationalism of the media coverage and inconsistent
information coming from the government and hospitals.Despite these, most HCW still
support each other and to ensure that all patients receive the best care possible.
Hence, the engagement of HCW for fighting against SARS is very important.
Effective communication and effective precautions against SARS can help to
22
eliminate fears of HCW and get their engagements.
Evaluations in communication and precaution measures among three areas,
namely, Hong Kong, Singapore and Canada can help us to get some insight into the
incident and the most effective methods can be borrowed for fighting against future
similar disease.
Communication
Singapore set up two websites for communication. Between 1 to 3 March 2003,
two Singaporean admitted to hospitals. On 17 March 2003, the Ministry of Health
(MOH) issues daily press statements to update the public on the situation in
Singapore. A list of FAQs has also been released to the media and have been put on
the MOH website. MOH also set up a hotline to handle all general public enquires.
HCW and Singaporeans can go to the websites to get what information they want.
Thus, little rumor will be created.
In the experience of Canada, communication is not so effective. Although local
public health units have responsibility to collect infectious disease information for
reportable disease at the individual case level, and provider are required to report such
information to the public health units. Public health does not have clear enough
responsibility to report this information back to providers. Public Health did not
interact closely with hospitals to identify the process and practices to the infections.
Communication related to SARS came from various components of the health care
system, with no clearly identified source and often with conflicting and or out-of-date
advice. There is no updated information on SARS as quoted by a staff that the
continuous requests for information on a minute-by-minute basis, day and night will
hampered the efforts of a limited number of overworked staff. Federal/Provincial
23
Territorial government had established National Crisis Communication strategy prior
to SARS to facilitate the planning and response to the communication inherent in a
wide rang of emergencies. But it was not yet performed during SARS period.
In Hong Kong, rumor also arose during SARS period. In 22 February 2003,
Professor Liu from Gangzhou attended KWH and infected his family member and
HCW. HAHO level did not alert other hospitals of the potential risk. During early
March, staff generally were not taking any extra precautions.
The outbreaks at PWH and PYNEH should trigger HA to issue a loud and clear
warning to all HA staff. However, communication is not sufficiently clear or
effective. Finally, HCW found the outbreaks from the newspaper. There was no
explicit warning about the possibility of patients who were ‘unsuspected’ but could
spread the disease. As late as 31 March 2003, a daily update newsletter was printed
and hand delivered to staff at the frontline. A lack of internal feedback made HWC to
air their grievances through daily radio phone-in program. Hence, at the end of April
the Board Task Force set up three executive groups. The board members made regular
visits to hospital helping to improve communications and to ensure that important
messages on infection control and PPE supplies were reaching the frontline.
Precaution Measures
The government Singapore also performed better. On 6 March 2003, MOH
advised hospitals to isolate patients and take necessary infection control measure. In
‘the statement from the Minister for Health coping with SARS’ of 4 April 2003
detailed the precaution measures against SARS and how to deal with patients with
SARS. All health care institutions needed to set up special teams to prevent and
24
control SARS. The ministry would carry out audits on health care institutions to
ensure compliance with the infection control practices.
However in Canada, there are very different policies and procedures for dealing
with outbreaks of infectious disease among hospitals. The protocols did not appear to
provide sufficient information or instruction to define how to manage severe
outbreaks. HWC emphasized the need for standard protocols and practice in outbreak
management.
In Hong Kong, as late as 27 March 2003, a policy to suspend visiting to
suspected and confirmed SARS patients was implemented. On 3 April 203, ‘no
visiting’ policy was introduced as well as guidelines on mandatory wearing of masks
for all patients and staff.
Therefore, the performance of Singapore in SARS case seems the best among the
other two. Singapore government reacts more quickly and have contingency plan on
emergency events.
Recommendations
The government should establish a surveillance role to accumulate and analyze
the locally collected information and establish a communication process that alerts
hospital about unusual patterns. The government should also set up a single
communication source for communication and a process to minimize frequent
changes to information and conflicting information in an emergency.
In cases of an emerging unknown infectious disease any indications that it is
infective to HCW should be communicated to frontline staff immediately, together
with guidelines in infection control measures. The HA must review its strategy for
25
internal communications and level of resources and expertise it allocates to this vital
area. Mechanism must be established to facilitate obtaining frank and timely feedback
from HWC in times of crisis. The HA should provide continuous training for HWC
over infection control and precaution measures. The HA should set up formal
psychological counseling unit to help staff and their families in every hospital. HA
can set up an insurance fund to cover HCW who become sick or die through work
during emergency period such as SARS. The HA should make use of two kind of
communication channels, i.e. cascade message and target message to ensure message
can be read by HCW.
Unions and Professional Associations
Their main concerns are the interest of members. They aim at fostering friendly
relations and co-operation amongst members and at enhancing professional
development of members. Therefore, they are with high level of interest and high
power. They are the passive key players in managing the SARS outbreaks.
In Singapore, a Courage Fund has been set up by the two health care clusters,
the Singapore Medical Association, Singapore Nurses Association to help families of
needy SARS patients in honor of all HCW in Singapore. Thus, the influences of
unions and professional associations are not very great in Singapore. The government
can engage them in SARS event.
In Canada, unions and professional associations are more influential. Owing to
the mounting association pressure form nursing associations, unions, opposition
politicians and media, the Province of Ontario announced investigation into the SARS
crisis. Ontario Hospital Association and the Ontario Medical Association made efforts
26
to communicate with their members about SARS and to support the outbreak
response.
In Hong Kong, unions and professional associations are also more influential.
They joint effort to combat SARS, updated information on SARS, organized SARS
seminars, source protective gears for members, educate the public on how to protect
themselves, set up community network among private medical practitioners for
screening SARS, and set up SARS sub-page in their homepage at internet. The
examples are Hong Kong Medical Association (HKMA), Hong Kong Public Doctors’
Association and Association of Hong Kong Nursing Staffs. The HKMA also
participate in and support research on SARS, mobilizing members to act as voluntary
medical advisers to school (One School One Doctor Scheme). In addition, it mobilizes
its members to volunteer their services to HA patients with chronic illnesses, who are
afraid of going to public hospitals for follow-up.
In spite of the information of Singapore and Canada is not enough, it involves
difficulty in comparison. Anyway, they can engage unions and professional
associations to give a hand to fight against SARS.
Recommendations
The HA should communicate more with them and exercise more influence on the
as they can be treated as a reserve of professional manpower in future similar disease.
Moreover, they also provide ethical standard input to their members.
Media
During SARS, Media had played an important role in responding to the incident
and it was because of their reporting which in turn activate the concerned
organizations to take actions that made the whole situation changed. Firstly in the
27
early part of 2003, the Hong Kong media started reporting on pneumonia-like
‘mystery illness’ affecting people in Guangdong. In the vacuum of definitive
information the media reports focused on panic buying of white vinegar, which was
rumored to provide protection. Following with hindsight the first official
announcement at a Guangzhou City Government News Conference on the ominous
warning of the looming threat of over 100 cases of atypical pneumonia including
healthcare workers who worked in a few local hospitals where there was neither
enough awareness of the disease nor adequate supply of protective gear. Then came
up with the case of Professor Liu, the hospital outbreak amongst healthcare workers,
the Metropole Hotel connection, the Amoy Gardens involvement and so on, all these
were reported by the media to the public. The media had raised the attention of the
Hospital Authority, the related government departments and the general public. Their
interests are to report the first-hand material: exposing the new unknown infectious
disease, the action of the Hospital Authority and the weaknesses of the management
structure, reflecting the situation of the frontlines, seeking information, expert opinion
with the related matters to increase the knowledge level, kept the pubic being
informed of the situation and help to disseminate the correct information and
preventive measures.
In engaging with the media and to alleviate the public panic, Hospital Authority
had enhanced the communication with the public and the media which was
coordinated by the HA Public Affairs Department. During the outbreak a range of
methods were used to communicate with the media and public including: press
releases (35 by HAHO, 7 by clusters and 30 by hospitals); press briefings; editors
briefings; radio programs; 16 TV programs; 24 educational talks; 6 community
forums; 7 contributed articles; and an exhibition. Daily attendance at a radio phone-in
28
program by senior HAHO staff commenced on 11 March and continued to 25 April,
2003, after which it was arranged as necessary. For the initial period, the
communication and information was still confusing and public had the impression that
HA was hiding something. The situation was improved until 19 March, 2003 when
HAHO and DH conducted a joint daily press briefing. Through April HAHA
continued to arrange communications with a view to inform and educate the public on
prevention of SARS. This included announcements on treatment, interviews with
recovered staff and patients and meetings with columnist, editors and academics
(Report of the HA Review Panel on the SARS Outbreak, 2003).
Although HA was noticed in improving their performance progressively during
the course of SARS with the media but still that it lost the external communications
battle. This was initially rooted in a failure to provide effective means for internal
staff feedback, which resulted in staff raising their concerns in the public arena. This
was reflected through the daily radio phone-in program which HA staff publicly aired
phone calls to their own Directors voicing out various complaints.
Herewith recommend the HAHO should appoint an experienced public affairs
staff or agreed spokesman to handle the media so as to maintain a consistent and unity
of message to avoid confusion. Also the Director attending the media program should
make positive use of the airtime to disseminate policy, information, contingency
measures and reassurance to public and staff rather than answering public questions
and being used as a punch bag or defending itself against mounting criticism. Also it
would be better to appear on different media channel with fair occurrence to avoid
dominate by any one of the media so as to get an equilibrium of power of different
media.
29
The key player function was being performed distinctly by the media with their
high influencing power.
Patients
The interests of patients are high as they were keen to know the whole situation
of SARS. Such as the disease, treatment, preventive measures and so forth. As the
non SARS patients were trying their best to protect oneself and family to avoid
infected. On the other hand, the SARS patients would want to know how the HA was
going to treat them, what were the progress of the disease and the same that they were
afraid of infecting the others. So the policy and quality of care of the hospital were
most concern of them but they got no power to interfere with HA.
According to the mapping, HA would well engage with this segment of
stakeholder if HA could keep inform of the situation to them. But HA was not
performing well as it itself was so confused in various aspects which in turn caused
the consequent effect of the patients. The patients were worry, anxious, confuse about
the policy of hospital and felt being isolated, and discriminated. They might even
have no confidence and trust of HA which they might deny of information.
In order to handle the segment of stakeholder better, we would recommend HA
providing simple, clear, open, honest and transparent communication to secure the
trust and confidence of patients. For patient care, HA should train staff about
effective communication, provide communication channels e.g. designed phone for
patients to communicate with relatives, provide delivery service for patients’
necessities. Also HA could make use of different patient group to disseminate
information to avoid confusion. For the environment and facilities: development of
operational protocol in general ward for an out break of infectious disease, early
30
introduction and implementation of cohort or step down wards to reduce the risk of
cross infection. For infection control measures: strict implementation was important
so orientation and briefing of measures on admissions to patients was necessary.
Improvement of the toilet and shower facilities, adequate bed spacing and
arrangement of negative pressure or isolation room for high risk procedures should be
followed.
For post-discharge service, enhancement of follow-up care, advice and
psychological support were important. HA should organize programs for high quality
aftercare and counseling to all surviving SARS patients and families.
Suppliers
Suppliers are those organizations supplying material resources that needed for
the provision of health care services, which included pharmaceuticals, medical
equipment companies, personal protective equipment manufacturers, etc.,. As the
activities and decisions of the suppliers can influence or impede the operation of the
health care service provider, they bear high power and are important external
stakeholders to the Hospital Authority. There existed lots of uncertainty during the
SARS epidemic and this episode had brought lots of commercial chances to them as
the demand of medical related necessities increase drastically. According to the
stakeholders’ theory, the Hospital Authority should build up stakeholder partnership
with the suppliers to maintain good communication and commercial relationship
between the two parties.
Apart from profit making commercial activities, the suppliers bear the social
responsibility of serving the public by providing good quality medical products and
31
promoting the health care service standard of the public. During SARS period, the
price of protective clothing increase sharply as the demand increases. Moreover, there
existed the crisis of medical equipment shortage. To prevent the same problem, we
suggest developing a contingency mechanism to ensure there will be adequate supply
of medical necessities with reasonable price.
Residential care homes
Residential care homes may either be profit making or non-profit making. They
may have to receive step down cases from acute hospital and bear the responsibility of
protecting their resident from getting infected. To achieve this goal, they have to
follow the instructions from the government in maintaining the hygiene standard of
the hostel, make notification and report in case of the outbreak of disease. However,
during the SARS period they were neither able to participate in the decision making
process of the Hospital Authority nor affect its operation.
Being an external stakeholder bearing high interest but low power, the Hospital
Authority should keep the residential care homes informed. According to the
stakeholder theory, when the stakeholder is not critical but the environmental
uncertainty is high, managers can use boundary spanning in order to manage the
stakeholder relationship more proactively. The Hospital Authority should set up
committee with the keepers of residential care home to ensure patent communication,
gathering and disseminate important information, and sharing patient care experience.
Besides, more resources should be put on developing the Community Geriatric
Assessment Team or Visiting Medical Officer Schemes to provide support in
surveillance, disease prevention and containment to prevent future outbreak of
infectious disease.
32
Universities and Scholars
Universities and Scholars bear the responsibility of providing education and
promote academic development. Moreover, they have the social responsibility to
maintain the health and stability of the Hong Kong population in times of crises.
During the SARS period, they took the role of investigating the social and clinical
management method in containing the disease, which was very important in affecting
the policies and actions of the Hospital Authority.
Being a critical stakeholder, to ensure proactive arrangement between the
Hospital Authority and the scholars, a joint academic and clinical panel in
investigating the episode should be set up to maintain their stakeholder partnership in
pursuing the common goal of disease containment. Moreover, the Hospital Authority
should work with the universities and research funding providers to set up a research
team placing due emphasis on projects investigating public health and communicable
disease containment which prevent future outbreaks of other infectious disease.
Besides, joint effort should be make between the Hospital Authority and the
universities in educating the population by promoting the public hygiene and health.
CONCLUSION
The success of combating SARS can be affected by how the key players and
other stakeholders are dealt with. As the main organization that combat the disease,
the HA should work in one accord with the HWFB and DH, the key players in the
public health management structure to set up a united information platform in
communication to avoid confusion in command and information among all the
stakeholders. Moreover, the HAHO should work jointly with the HA Board to clearly
33
delineate the roles and responsibilities of the Board, the Chairman and the Chief
Executive during crises situation and set up permanent policies in addressing the
roles, responsibilities and authorities of all stakeholders involved. There should be
clear plans on when and how the various stakeholders should be engaged in outbreak
of similar nature in the future. Control and command should then be centralized to one
office to declare all the procedures, protocols and actions, and the allocation of
medical supplies and workforce in times of outbreaks.
34
References
1. Cook M. & Farqularson C. (1998). Business Economics. Prentice Hall.
2. Johnson G. & Scholes K. (2002). Exploring Corporate Strategy, Text and Cases,
6th Ed. Prentice Hall, Pearson Education Limited.
3. Lynch R. (2003). Corporate Strategy, 3rd Ed. Prentice Hall. Pearson Education
Limited.
4. Report of the Hospital Authority Review Panel on the SARS Outbreak. (2003)
Hospital Authority.
5. Robbins S. & Coulter M. (2002). Management. 7th ED. Prentice Hall, New
Jersey.
6. Learning from SARS – renewal of Public Health in Canada
7. A report of the National Advisory Committee on SARS and Public Health, Oct,
2003
8. Report of the Hospital Authority Review Panel on the SARS Outbreak, Sept, 2003
9. Ministry of Health of Singapore-Newsroom http://app.moh.gov.sg/new/new01.asp
access on 1 May 2004
10. SARS of Singapore http://www.moh.gov.sg/sars/index.html access on 1 May 2004
35