# Introduction ccording to the Institute of Medicine (IOM; Bootman 2000), between 44 000 and 98 000 patients die every year in the US as a result of preventable medical errors and another million or so are injured (Bootman 2000; Kohn et al. 2001). These findings led to an initiative by the US Federal Government to improve patient safety and create a more cost-effective healthcare system (Porter and Teisberg 2006; Shortell and Singer 2008;Singer et al. 2003). The US Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) also attempted to reduce medical errors and improve patient safety, while holding hospitals accountable (Leape and Berwick 2005;McGlynn et al. 2003). Their quality measures relate to certain medical conditions that are particularly prone to preventable medical errors, which are available for 98% of US hospitals (nearly 4700) and are a widely used benchmark for the quality of care provided by a hospital to its patients and thus used to quantify performance (Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), 2011). They also encourage competition between hospitals (Arrow et Shojania et al. 2001), but we used the CMS measures to assess quality-of-care performance in our study (CMS database; HHS 2011). # a) Theoretical context To satisfy the need to provide high-quality and safe patient care and reduce costs, hospitals must establish efficient organizational traits and suitable leadership styles within the context of either modern or lean management systems. There has been limited success of the major initiatives so far (Leape and Berwick 2005;Singer and Shortell 2008). As Porter (2009) noted: "The US healthcare system remains largely the same as it was a decade ago with no convincing approach to changing the unsustainable trajectory of the system, much less to offsetting the rising costs of an aging population and new medical advances." Implementing successful systems and processes is still a challenge for hospitals. They are aware of the need to, but struggle with the choices available (Boyer et al. 2012;Proudlove et al. 2008), not least because of a lack of studies in the area. Hence the rationale behind the present study which aims to identify specific drivers of performance in terms of quality of care (HHS, 2011) and investigate the interrelationships between management systems, organizational traits and leadership. Studies have been conducted into lean management practices in healthcare, particularly organizational learning, standardized processes, tools and continuous improvement (Boyer and ). There may be observational bias in studies with limited population sizes that focus on one type of hospital (Kane 2006), which may mask the effects of management systems, organizational traits and leadership on performance outcomes. This study focused on factors from four variables -lean management, modern management, organizational traits, and leadership -using the publicly available CMS quality-of-care measures (HHS 2011) for nearly 4700 hospitals. These factors constituted the dependent variable for measuring overall performance, and consisted of factors relating to acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, pneumonia and the surgical care improvement project (HHS 2011). Independent variables were collected by surveying 597 hospitals related to four key criteria (Figure 1): lean management principles, modern management principles, organizational traits and leadership characteristics. An empirical census survey has been conducted to test the construct shown in Our study examined both lean and modern management in the hospital environment. Modern management ideas, originally from Alfred Sloan at General Motors, were adapted by General Electric and others until the 1990s (Lean Enterprise Institute 2010; Womack 2010). This style of management promotes organizations with departments, clear managerial authorities, vertical delegation, and a top-down approach; managers are developed through formal education and decisions are made far from the point of value creation. Its practices are not viewed favourably by lean management organizations (Womack 2010), the principles of which are based on the Toyota production system (Liker, 2004). The lean management philosophy focuses on horizontal flow of value across a hospital and on improving processes towards a perfect patient experience. This study treated modern and lean management as separate factors and used explanatory factor analysis and principal component extraction to combine them analytically. # c) Organizational traits Firm, well-rounded organizational traits in hospitals correlate positively with effectiveness, efficiency and innovation (Dalton et al. 1980;Robinson and Luft 1985). We investigate whether organizational traits have any impact on hospital performance. # d) Transformational and transactional leadership Our analysis was based on empirical evidence of the influence of transformational and transactional characteristics on quality outcomes. According to leadership theory, hospital performance and quality of care strongly depend on leadership ( 2005). No significant difference was found between responders and non-responders (p = 0.1654-0.8753). # c) Covariates Covariates were selected for within-hospital factors, including the type of hospital (cv3; acute care, acute care veterans administration, or critical access) and organizational structure (subsidiary or stand-alone) (CMS 2012). External factors included the number of years respondents had been employed by their hospital. # d) Data analysis Confirmatory factor analysis (Dyer et al. 2005;Thompson et al. 2004) was used for each of the independent variables to account for common variance. Internal reliability and validity of dichotomous items were checked using Cronbach's alpha (Bland and Altman 1997;Gliem and Gliem 2003). All components had reliability alpha > 0.8, indicating good internal consistency. Our quality-of-care measure (dependent variable and a number between 0 and 1) was non-linear, requiring logit transformation (Ashton 1972;Jaeger 2008), and we used all-subset multiple linear regression (Belsley 1980; Myers 1990). To select the statistical model, we applied forward elimination and a nominated alpha of 0.05. To account for errors in selection, we used an 80% sample of our dataset. The remaining 20% were used to assess the model's accuracy (mean absolute percent error; mean error) and bias (Hocking and Leslie 1967). # III. # Results # a) Survey data We received 186 questionnaires with all questions answered. We split them 80/20 (147/29) to create and validate the model and check for bias and errors. No correlations exceeded 0.47 or triggered further investigations (Thompson et al. 2004). After checking the individual effects of items separately, with an absence of differences in results, we ran the best subset model creation algorithm for all items (Myers 1990; Belsley et al. 1980). For the four all-subset models (for all components investigated), significant items were shown and ranked according to adjusted R 2 (coefficient of determination), showing that the best-fitting model includes covariate cv3 (type of hospital), and two independent variables, q8 (modern management system factor Managers often have to revisit/rework problems because they did not determine the root cause) and q10 (lean management factor Managers are responsible for cross-functional activities in addition to their own functional areas). Covariate cv3 is important in the quality-of-care performance of hospitals, whereby acute-care hospitals are associated with positive outcomes. Table 1 shows that independent variables q8 and q10 both relate negatively to hospital performance. Table 2 shows the R 2 to be 0.167, meaning that 16.7% of the variation in quality-of-care performance among hospitals can be explained by a model consisting of variables cv3, q10 and q8. Terms for which estimates are followed by the letter B are not uniquely estimable. # Year ( ) We theorized that lean management has an impact on hospital quality-of-care performance. However, Table 1 shows that items q10 and q8 have a significant, negative impact on hospital performance. We found no evidence that organizational traits or leadership have any impact. None of the items in our best model pertaining to leadership were found to be significant (alpha 0.05). Our results remain robust after a series of checks on our all-subset multiple linear regression model. We controlled for other hospital-level covariates such as hospital ownership (proprietary, voluntary nonprofit and government), the state in which it is located, and the type of organization (investor owned and for profit, non-government and non-profit, and state and local government), but found no significant influence on performance. Therefore, we did not include any of these covariates in our best subset model list. Controlling for states showed that being located in Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin had a negative influence on performance. At the hospital level, we checked whether performance was influenced by belonging to a chain or a self-standing organization, and found a moderate negative effect (comparing means), but this did not influence our best model selection. We also tested the impact of some process improvement factors on performance, whether they hospitals are "owned" by a focused, one-purpose process improvement department or handled by a department with additional tasks (e.g. a qualitymanagement department). We found a negative effect for situations where process improvements are handled by departments with additional tasks, but this was not strong enough to change our model. We also tested the impact of resource allocation in terms of FTEs (full-time equivalents) towards process improvement initiatives and found a negative influence of low FTEs (0 and 0.01-0.75 FTEs), and a small positive effect if 0.76-4.00 FTEs are allocated. None of the above robustness checks resulted in changes to our model that best predicts variation in hospital performance (Table 1). We also checked for robustness of our model using a proportion of the results that were withheld in order to assess bias and accuracy as mean absolute percent error and mean error (Hocking and Leslie 1967). Thus, all of our results proved the robustness of our model and the presence of significance of determination. IV. # Discussion Our study tests how factors pertaining to lean management, modern management, leadership and organizational traits impact on quality-of-care performance outcomes in US hospitals, using CMS data from 2010 (CMS 2011) and survey information from 2011. We found that management system factors do influence hospital performance, but not to the expected extent. Current management systems are often ineffective for managing the growing demand for care (Porter 2009; Porter and Teisberg 2007). We found one factor of modern management (Womack 2009) that negatively impacts on hospital performance, providing a potential area for improvement, namely Managers often have to revisit/rework problems because they did not determine the root cause. Our finding supports Womack's (2009) claim that without the right mindset and tools to solve the root cause of problems, sustainable improvements are not possible (Liker 2004;Womack 2002;Womack 2008). Hospitals need to empower their employees to resolve such issues. We found no positive influence of lean management on performance, but the item Managers are responsible for cross-functional activities in addition to their own functional areas was negatively related. This finding should be interpreted with care, because the phrasing of the question might have led respondents to assume that efficiency increases if clear functionalities are in place (rather than that managers have to deal with both functional and cross-functional activities). These findings do not concur with those of Birkmeyer Another challenge is to identify organizational traits that drive performance. We found no evidence that such traits have any impact, although one covariate had a moderate negative impact when the improvement initiative is part of a department and not an independent unit. These results are inconsistent with research on the influence of organizational characteristics (Aiken et al. 1994(Aiken et al. , 2002 Unlike most studies that investigate individual aspects of hospital performance, we derived an overall construct using an all-subset multiple linear regression (Belsley et al. 1980;Myers 1990). This method accounts for correlations, Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) numbers and residual sums of squares, and eliminates the influence of co linearity. There are limitations, however, such as over-fitting the model, and selecting the wrong variables due to correlated proxies. These results should be interpreted with care, therefore, especially because logit transformation of performance score was used to achieve linearity of data. There are several limitations associated with survey-based research (Dillman 2007;Rea and Parker 2005). In our case, responses were drawn from only one respondent from each hospital (Dillman 2007; Rea and Parker 2005), and certain states were misrepresented or under-represented (namely, Alaska, Hawaii and Idaho). Again caution is advised when generalizing about these findings. A further limitation was that we measured four factors using questions derived from multiple sources (Bass and Avolio 1994;Eagly et al. 2003;Greene 1975;Hirst et al. 2004;Pawar and Eastman 1997;Wofford-Vicki et al. 1998). These should be validated in the hospital context. Furthermore, the questionnaire had only been used twice previously, within manufacturing environments, calling for further research within the healthcare and other industries. This study contributes to our understanding of the influence of selected factors on hospital performance. It highlights the need for ongoing research in operations management, strategy and healthcare delivery, particularly with respect to management systems (modern vs lean), hospital type (acute vs critical care), transformational and transactional leadership, and organizational characteristics. A better understanding of the drivers of hospital performance will increase the chance of affordable, quality healthcare in the USA. # Global 1![e.g. Boyer et al. 2012; Marley et al. 2004).](image-2.png "Figure 1 (") 1![All subset model p values b) Lean (process) and modern management principles Patient safety in the US has not improved as intended according to the Institute of Medicine's 2009 report (Bootman 2000) by Jewell and McGiffert (2009). Additional observations from Wachter (2010) state that improvements in patient safety require a focus by leaders on lean management, workforce issues and training. There are challenges in the implementation of lean management initiatives (Blendon et al. 2002; Boyer and Pronovost 2010; Edmondson et al. 2001; Singer and Shortell 2008; Tucker et al. 2006). For example, hospital associates who notice their work is affected by changes are likely to sabotage the initiatives (Singer and Shortell 2008), and people who are unfamiliar with the new processes are reluctant to buy-in to them (Edmondson et al. 2001; Tucker et al. 2006). Physicians are least likely to embrace lean management principles (Blendon et al. 2002), and hierarchical barriers that cause power distance also inhibit take-up (Boyer and Pronovost 2010; Pronovost and Vohr 2010). This slow take-up occurs even though some hospitals have improved their performance through such efforts. Examples are Virginia Mason Medical Center and Theda Care Inc. (Ben-Tovim et al. 2007; Institute for Healthcare Improvement 2012; Kenney 2010; Nelson-Peterson and Leppa 2007). Observations show that hospitals applying lean management out-perform, on average, those that do not.](image-3.png "Table 1 :") ![Journal of Management and Business ResearchVolume XVI Issue II Version I](image-4.png "") Author ?: VU University Medical Center. e-mail: k.aij@vumc.nl There were 30 non-responders who were contacted byitems), pneumonia (7 items) and the surgical carephone and tested non-response bias by one demographic question, six organizational traits questions and one continuous improvement methodology question (Alreck and Settle 1995; Connolly and Connolly 2005; Dillman 2007; Rea and Parkerimprovement project (b) Survey dataSurvey data were collected from 597 hospitals.The questionnaire consisted of Likert-scale, open-ended and categorical-scale questions on specificYearmanagement and organizational issues, hospitalindicators (such as inpatient days, triage, discharge,1998). Transactional leadership is driven by "management-by-exceptions" and contingent rewards (Bass and Avolio 1994); critics claim that it does not consider the human aspect of work and fails to empower people (Bass and Avolio 1994). Both styles have drawbacks, but hospitals employing either tend to perform better than hospitals that use neither. A few studies reveal that combining transformational and transactional traits can produce even better outcomes than applying them separately (Eagly et al. 2003; Greene 1975; Hirst et al. 2004; Pawar and Eastman 1997; Wofford-Vicki et al. 1998). The survey also addressed hospital indicators such as inpatient days, triage, discharge, turnover rates, Apache scores, hospital background and improvement methodologies. The secondary dataset derived from the CMS database was only applied to hospitals for which we also had survey data. II. Materials and Methods a) Hospital performance data Hospital data were compiled from publicly? 9 questions on lean management (adapted from Womack 2009). ? 9 questions on modern management (adapted from Womack 2002; 2008) ? 6 questions on organizational traits addressing how well the hospital functions effectively, efficiently and innovatively, and why patients and associates are satisfied with its performance (adapted from Great Place to Work 2012; NIST 2011; Womack 2009) ? 12 question on leadership (adapted from the multifactor leadership questionnaire (Avolio and Bernard 2004; Bass and Avolio 1994), Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence (Hutton 2000), transformational leadership questionnaire (TLQ-turnover rates, 1997). The final questionnaire comprised:Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XVI Issue II Version I ( ) Aavailable Government records (HHS, 2011; CMS 2010)LGV, Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2000) andfor 4697 hospitals from the American Hospitala publication by McGuire and Kennerly (2006)).Association, State Hospital Associations, and theQuestionnaires were emailed to hospitalInstitute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI, 2010). Themanagers across 48 states (Rea and Parker 2005)performance indicators relate to serious healthbetween July and October 2011. A total of 597 wereconditions associated with preventable medical errors:returned, with different response rates from differentacute myocardial infarction (8 items), heart failure (4states (e.g. none from Rhode Island and 38 from Texas). 1ParameterHospital typeEstimateStandard errort valueProbability > |t|Intercept-0.9913095284 B0.0352422528.13< 0.001Cv3Acute care VA0.0000000000 B---Cv3Acute care0.0559908743 B0.012784684.38< 0.001Cv3Critical access0.0000000000 B---Q10--0.01646345430.00615886-2.670.0084Q8--0.01608011690.00603145-2.670.0086VA, veterans' administration. © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) 1 © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) Influence of Leadership Factors and Lean and Modern Management Styles on Quality-Of-Care Performance of Hospitals in the USA * Hospital staffing, organization, and quality of care: Cross-national findings LHAiken SPClarke DMSloane International Journal for Quality in Healthcare 14 1 2002 * Lower Medicare mortality among a set of hospitals known for good nursing care LHAiken HLSmith ETLake Medical Care 32 8 1994 * Factor analysis and AIC HAkaike Psychometrika 52 3 1987 * The Transformational Leadership questionnaire: A convergent and discriminant validation study RobertJAlban-Metcalfe BeverlyAlimo-Metcalfe Doi: 10.1108/0 Leadership & Organization Development Journal 21 6 1437730010343077 2000 * The Survey Research Handbook PLAlreck RBSettle 1995 Irwin: Chicago * AHA Guide American Hospital Association 2011. 2010 AHA * Research on evidence-based practices: Future directions in an era of recovery WAnthony ESRogers MFarkas Community Mental Health Journal 39 2 2003 * toward a 21st-century healthcare system: Recommendations for healthcare reform KArrow AAuerbach JBertko Annals of Internal Medicine 150 7 2009 * The Logit Transformation: With Special Reference to Its Uses in Bioassay WDAshton 1972 Griffin; London * BJAvolio MBernard Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire: Manual and Sampler Set. Mind Garden Menlo Park, CA 2004 * Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational Leadership BMBass BJAvolio 1994 Sage Publications Thousand Oaks, CA * Regression Diagnostics DABelsley EKuh REWelsch 10.1111/j.1467-9574.1980.tb00698.x/abstract 1980 Wiley Online Library * Lean thinking across a hospital: Redesigning care at the Flinders Medical Centre DIBen-Tovim JEBassham DBolch MAMartin MDougherty MSzwarcbord Australian Health Review 31 1 2007 * Setting targets for healthcare performance lessons from a case study of the English NHS GBevan National Institute Economic Review 197 1 2006 * Strategies for improving surgical quality-Checklists and beyond JDBirkmeyer New England Journal of Medicine 363 20 2010 * Cronbach's Alpha JMBland DGAltman British Medical Journal 314 7080 572 1997 * Views of practicing physicians and the public on medical errors RJBlendon CMDesroches MBrodie New England Journal of Medicine 347 24 2002 * To err is human JLBootman Doi: 10.1001/ archinte.160.21.3189 Archive of Internal Medicine 160 21 3189 2000 * Process quality improvement: An examination of general vs outcome-specific climate and practices in hospitals KKBoyer JGardner SSchweikhart Journal of Operations Management 30 4 2012 * What medicine can teach operations: What operations can teach medicine KKBoyer PPronovost Journal of Operations Management 28 5 2010 * Change in organisations: A case study of the use of accounting information in the NHS JBroadbent The British Accounting Review 24 4 1992 * Impact of the nurse shortage on hospital patient care: Comparative perspectives PIBuerhaus KDonelan BTUlrich LNorman CDesroches RDittus Health Affairs 26 3 2007 * Is the shortage of hospital registered nurses getting better or worse? Findings from two recent national surveys of RNs PIBuerhaus KDonelan BTUlrich LNorman RDittus Nursing Economics 23 2 2005 * Adoption and abandonment of matrix management programs: Effects of organizational characteristics and inter organizational networks LRBurns DRWholey Academy of Management Journal 36 1993 * Patient satisfaction as an indicator of quality care PDCleary BJMcneil Inquiry: A Journal of Medical Care Organization, Provision and Financing 25 1 25 1988 * Employee Opinion Questionnaires: 20 Ready-to-Use Surveys That Work PMConnolly KGConnolly 2005 Pfeiffer; San Francisco, CA * Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis ABCostello JWOsborne Research & Evaluation 10 7 2005 Practical Assessment * Organization structure and performance: A critical review DRDalton WDTodor MJSpendolini GJFielding LWPorter Academy of Management Review 5 1 1980 * Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (2011) Hospital Compare * Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method DADillman 2007 John Wiley & Sons New Jersey * Applying multilevel confirmatory factor analysis techniques to the study of leadership NGDyer PJHanges RJHall The Leadership Quarterly 16 1 2005 * Transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men AHEagly MCJohannesen-Schmidt MLVan Engen Psychological Bulletin 129 4 2003 * ACEdmondson RMBohmer GPPisano Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals 2001 * Administrative Science Quarterly 46 4 * A framework for quality management research and an associated measurement instrument BBFlynn RGSchroeder SSakakibara Journal of Operations Management 11 4 1994 * Improving Survey Questions: Design and Evaluation FJFowler 1995 Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks * Development, implementation and public reporting of the HCAHPS survey LAGiordano MNElliott EGoldstein WGLehrman PASpencer Medical Care Research and Review 67 1 2010 * Calculating, Interpreting and Reporting Cronbach's Alpha Reliability Coefficient for Likert-type Scales JAGliem RRGliem Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing and Community Education Columbus, Ohio 2003 88 Ohio State University * Great Place to Work Institute United States 2012 Great Place to Work® * The reciprocal nature of influence between leader and subordinate CNGreene Journal of Applied Psychology 60 2 1975 * Addressing the nurse shortage to improve the quality of patient care SBHassmiller MCozine Health Affairs 25 1 2006 * GHirst LMann * Learning to lead: The development and testing of a model of leadership learning PBain APirola-Merlo ARichver The Leadership Quarterly 15 3 2004 * Selection of the best subset in regression analysis RRHocking RNLeslie Technometrics 9 4 1967 * From Baldrige to the Bottom Line: A Road Map for Organizational Change and Improvement DWHutton 2000 American Society for Quality Milwaukee, WI * Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) (2010) IHI Internal Hospital Statistics Database 2011. Institute for Healthcare Improvement Cambridge, MA * MudaKanban ValueStream Priori Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) (2012) White Paper. Lean Principles, Throughput Time, Lean Thinking Lean Management Trystorm. Available at Kaizen, Takt Time * Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models TJaeger Journal of Memory and Language 59 4 2008 * To Err Is Human-to Delay Is Deadly KJewell LMcgiffert 2009 Austin, TX * Quality of care and patient outcomes in critical access rural hospitals KEJoynt YHarris EJOrav AKJha Journal of the American Medical Association 306 1 45 2011 * Understanding Health Care Outcomes Research RLKane 2006 Jones & Bartlett Learning Sudbury, MA * The relationship of patient satisfaction with care and clinical outcomes RLKane MMaciejewski MFinch Medical Care 35 7 714 1997 * Qualitative Research: Case Study Evaluation JKeen TPackwood British Medical Journal 311 7002 1995 * Transforming Healthcare: Virginia Mason Medical Venter's Pursuit of the Perfect Patient Experience CKenney 2011 Productivity Press New York, NY * Organizational innovation: The influence of individual, organizational and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and administrative Innovations JRKimberly MJEvanisko Academy of Management Journal 24 4 1981 * Enabling the implementation of evidence based practice: A conceptual framework AKitson GHarvey BMccormack Quality in Healthcare 7 3 1998 * Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century LTKohn JMCorrigan MSDonaldson 2001 Washington DC Committee on Quality of Healthcare in America, Institute of Medicine * Five years after to err is human. What have we learned LLLeape DMBerwick 10.1001/jama.293.19.2384 Journal of the American Medical Association 293 2005. 19 * The business case for quality: Case studies and an analysis SLeatherman DBerwick DIles Health Affairs 22 2 2003 * The Toyota Way JeffreyKLiker 2004 McGraw-Hill Professional New York * A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes RLikert Archives of Psychology 22 140 1932 * The role of clinical and process Quality in achieving patient satisfaction in hospitals KAMarley DACollier SMeyer Goldstein 10.1111/j.0011-7315.2004.02570.x Decision Sciences 35 3 2004 * The quality of healthcare delivered to adults in the United States EAMcglynn SMAsch JAdams JKeesey JHicks ADe Cristofaro EAKerr New England Journal of Medicine 348 26 2003 * Nurse managers as transformational and transactional leaders EMcguire SMKennerly Nursing Economics 24 4 179 2006 * An empirical test of the causal relationships in the Baldrige Healthcare Pilot Criteria SMMeyer DACollier Journal of Operations 2001 * The impact of hospital market structure on patient volume, average length of stay and the cost of care JCRobinson HSLuft Journal of Health Economics 4 4 1985 * Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in healthcare: A review and case studies. National Co-ordinating Centre for HTA (Great Britain) and NHS MJSculpher 2004 * Making Healthcare Safer: A Critical Analysis of Patient Safety Practices KGShojania BWDuncan KMMcdonald RMWachter AJMarkowitz 2001 Rockville MD * Improving patient safety by taking systems seriously SMShortell SJSinger Journal of the American Medical Association 299 4 2008 * The culture of safety: Results of an organization-wide survey in 15 SJSinger DMGaba JJGeppert ADSinaiko SKHoward KCPark California hospitals. Quality and Safety in Healthcare 12 2 2003 * Improving patient safety by taking systems seriously SJSinger SMShortell 10.1001/jama.299.4.445 Journal of the American Medical Association 299 4 2008 * Trends and approaches in lean healthcare LBDe Souza Leadership in Health Services 22 2 2009 * The dimensions of service quality for hospitals: Development and use of the KQCAH scale VSower JADuffy WKilbourne GKohers PJones Healthcare Management Review 26 2 47 2001 * Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Understanding Concepts and Applications BThompson 2004 American Psychological Association and Ovid Technologies Washington DC * Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units ALTucker IMNembhard ACEdmondson Harvard Business School. Division of Research. Citeseer 2006 * Providing patient-centred culturally sensitive health care CMTucker KCHerman LAFerdinand The Counseling Psychologist 35 5 2007 * CMS) (2010) Hospital quality MedicaidUs Center For Medicare Services pdf -Google Search * Quality initiative MedicaidUs Center For Medicare CMS Services CMS Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/QualityInitiativesGenInfo/index. html?redirect=/QualityInitiativesGenInfo/.Wachter, R.M. (2010) Patient safety at ten: unmistakable progress, troubling gaps 2012 29 * An Introduction to Survey Research, Polling and Data Analysis HFWeisberg JAKrosnick BDBowen 1996 Sage Publications * A field study of a cognitive approach to understanding transformational and transactional leadership LWofford-Vicki The Leadership Quarterly 9 1 1998 * Lean thinking: Where Have we been and where are we going? JPWomack Manufacturing Engineering 129 3 L2 2002 * The Power of Purpose JPWomack Process and People ess and People 2008 * Modern vs lean management assessment questionnaire. Internal LEI document for company assessments JPWomack 2009 Cambridge, MA, UK * Womack Modern vs Lean Management JPWomack 2010. August 25