What influences perceptions about the concept of return on investment from healthcare quality improvement programmes? An institutional theory perspective

Purpose This paper aims to highlight the factors influencing the conceptualisation of return on investment (ROI) from healthcare quality improvement (QI) programmes. Design/methodology/approach In their previous work, the authors found that the concept of ROI from QI is broad and includes numerous internal and external benefits for organisations. In this paper, the authors developed a framework outlining the factors that influence this conceptualisation of QI-ROI from an institutional theory perspective. The framework is based on the synthesis of their serial studies on the determinants of the concept of ROI from QI. The research was performed from 2020–2023 and involved a global multidisciplinary systematic literature review ( N = 68), qualitative interviews ( N = 16) and a Delphi study ( N = 23). The qualitative and Delphi studies were based on the publicly-funded mental healthcare in UK. Participants included board members, clinical and service directors, as well as QI leaders. Findings The authors outline a framework of internal and external institutional forces that influence the conceptualisation of ROI from QI programmes in mental healthcare and similar organisations. Based on these factors, the authors state several conjectures. In doing this, the authors highlight the ambiguities and uncertainties surrounding QI-ROI conceptualisation. These challenge leaders to balance various monetary and non-monetary benefits for organisations and health systems. This explains the broadness of the QI-ROI concept. Originality/value The authors developed a framework highlighting the forces underpinning the broad, ambiguous and sometimes uncertain nature of the QI-ROI concept. They raise awareness about dilemmas to be confronted in developing or applying any tool to evaluate the value for money of QI programmes. Specifically, the work highlights the limitations of the ROI methodology as a primary tool in the QI context and the need for a more comprehensive tool.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Health Governance
Published
2024-08-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhg-04-2024-0045
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What influences perceptions about the concept of return on investment from healthcare quality improvement programmes? An institutional theory perspective

S’thembile Thusini, Tayana Soukup, Claire Henderson
4 citations
International Journal of Health Governance
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
4.52
article

What influences perceptions about the concept of return on investment from healthcare quality improvement programmes? An institutional theory perspective

S’thembile Thusini, Tayana Soukup, Claire Henderson
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to highlight the factors influencing the conceptualisation of return on investment (ROI) from healthcare quality improvement (QI) programmes. Design/methodology/approach In their previous work, the authors found that the concept of ROI from QI is broad and includes numerous internal and external benefits for organisations. In this paper, the authors developed a framework outlining the factors that influence this conceptualisation of QI-ROI from an institutional theory perspective. The framework is based on the synthesis of their serial studies on the determinants of the concept of ROI from QI. The research was performed from 2020–2023 and involved a global multidisciplinary systematic literature review ( N = 68), qualitative interviews ( N = 16) and a Delphi study ( N = 23). The qualitative and Delphi studies were based on the publicly-funded mental healthcare in UK. Participants included board members, clinical and service directors, as well as QI leaders. Findings The authors outline a framework of internal and external institutional forces that influence the conceptualisation of ROI from QI programmes in mental healthcare and similar organisations. Based on these factors, the authors state several conjectures. In doing this, the authors highlight the ambiguities and uncertainties surrounding QI-ROI conceptualisation. These challenge leaders to balance various monetary and non-monetary benefits for organisations and health systems. This explains the broadness of the QI-ROI concept. Originality/value The authors developed a framework highlighting the forces underpinning the broad, ambiguous and sometimes uncertain nature of the QI-ROI concept. They raise awareness about dilemmas to be confronted in developing or applying any tool to evaluate the value for money of QI programmes. Specifically, the work highlights the limitations of the ROI methodology as a primary tool in the QI context and the need for a more comprehensive tool.

International Journal of Health GovernanceVol. 29(3)
King's College London (GB), Imperial College London (GB)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
4.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.