Assessing the fragmentation in hybrids' PM systems: the evaluation framework
| Evaluation aspect | Coding categories used | Coding example | Evaluation criteria for fragmentation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance goals | Coding category 1: a goal or measure for basic healthcare unit Coding category 2: a goal or measure for adult oral healthcare Coding category 3: a goal or measure for library Coding category 4: a goal or measure for maternity and children's health clinic Coding category 5: a goal or measure for domiciliary care Coding category 6: a goal or measure for youth center Coding category 7: a goal or measure for walk-in clinic Coding category 8: a goal or measure for community café | The goal called satisfaction to collaboration was a boundary object between all units, and it was coded with eight labels as each unit shared this goal |
|
| Performance measurement | The measure called satisfaction to collaboration was a boundary object between all units, and it was coded with eight labels as each unit shared this measure |
|
| Evaluation aspect | Coding categories used | Coding example | Evaluation criteria for fragmentation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance goals | Coding category 1: a goal or measure for basic healthcare unit | The goal called satisfaction to collaboration was a boundary object between all units, and it was coded with eight labels as each unit shared this goal | The percentage of totally isolated service units that have no shared performance goals (i.e. boundary objects) with other service units The percentage of performance goals that are boundary objects between all units The percentage of nonexistent dyadic relationships from the total amount of dyadic relationships (there are 28 possible dyadic relationships between eight service units) The average number of goals that connect any two service units together C-coefficient value of zero in the context of performance goals shows the nonexistent relationship between two service units in the hybrid |
| Performance measurement | The measure called satisfaction to collaboration was a boundary object between all units, and it was coded with eight labels as each unit shared this measure | The percentage of totally isolated service units that have no shared performance measures (i.e. boundary objects) with other service units The percentage of performance measures that are boundary objects between all units The percentage of nonexistent dyadic relationships from the total amount of dyadic relationships (there are 28 possible dyadic relationships between eight service units) The average number of performance measures that connect any two service units together C-coefficient value of zero in the context of performance measures shows the nonexistent relationship between two service units in the hybrid |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.