| Course | HCAD 8006 PhD Healthcare Administration Foundational Concepts |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 5 |
| Paper type | Doctoral discussion post with two replies |
| Length | About 560 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Discussion post, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | PhD in Healthcare Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCAD 8006 Week 5
Week 5 Discussion: Does General Management Theory Apply to Health Care?
Management Theory Imported From Other Industries Transfers Badly Into Health Care, on Three Grounds, With One Exception Conceded
Management theory developed in manufacturing and other industries transfers badly into health care, and the reasons are structural rather than cultural. I rest the case on three grounds.
First, the outcome a health care manager is accountable for is produced jointly by people who do not report to that manager. A plant manager directs the people who make the product. A hospital manager oversees nurses and staff but not, in most American hospitals, the physicians whose decisions determine much of what happens to a patient. Glouberman and Mintzberg (2001) described the field as split among four worlds, curing, caring, controlling and community, whose members answer to different loyalties, and the manager inhabits only one of them. Theories that assume a manager can redesign work by directing the people who do it begin from a premise that does not hold.
Second, the measurement infrastructure was built for billing, not for control. Manufacturing methods depend on measuring the process at each step. Health care's most complete data record what was billed, which is why Iezzoni (1997) warned that administrative data reflect their payment purpose and capture clinical reality only partly. A method that assumes accurate process measurement inherits data that were never designed for it.
Third, professional authority sits outside the organizational hierarchy. Clinical judgment is licensed by the state and governed by professional norms, not by the employer's chain of command. When a management method conflicts with clinical judgment, the method usually loses, and often should.
I concede one exception. Where work is genuinely under managerial control and well measured, such as supply chains, scheduling and transport, imported methods can transfer well. Radnor et al. (2012), reviewing lean in health care, found that much of its application has been limited to such process tools rather than the whole-system change lean promises, which I read as evidence for my position: methods transfer where health care resembles other industries and stall where it does not.
Reply to Arvid
Arvid, you argue against my position by pointing to the success of checklists in surgery, a method borrowed from aviation. That is a strong example, and I should take it seriously. I would note, though, that it fits my concession more than it refutes my claim. A checklist works in the operating room because the team is co-located, the steps are discrete and the surgeon has agreed to the protocol. Those are the conditions under which professional authority and managerial method align. Glouberman and Mintzberg (2001) would place the operating room squarely in the cure world, where a single team controls the work. Does your example extend to settings where the team is dispersed across organizations?
Reply to Leilani
Leilani, you agree with me but go further, arguing that health care needs its own management theory entirely. I would stop short of that. The problem is not that general theory is useless but that its assumptions must be checked against health care's structure before use. Radnor et al. (2012) show lean succeeding at the process level, which suggests adaptation rather than replacement. A health-specific theory would also face the problem that health care is not one industry; a primary care practice and an academic medical center differ as much as either differs from a factory.
References
Glouberman, S., & Mintzberg, H. (2001). Managing the care of health and the cure of disease: Part I. Differentiation. Health Care Management Review, 26(1), 56-69. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004010-200101000-00006
Iezzoni, L. I. (1997). Assessing quality using administrative data. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127(8, Pt. 2), 666-674. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-127-8_Part_2-199710151-00048
Radnor, Z. J., Holweg, M., & Waring, J. (2012). Lean in healthcare: The unfilled promise? Social Science & Medicine, 74(3), 364-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.02.011
Reading the HCAD 8006 Week 5 instructions
In Week 5 the task is to take one side of a question on which informed readers genuinely split. State your position in the first sentence or two and do not drift toward the middle. Support it with a small number of grounds, each stated as a claim with a reason rather than an impression. Use sources for specific steps in the argument. Concede the strongest exception or counterexample in its own paragraph and show how your position accommodates it, or narrow your position if it does not. In replies, take counterexamples seriously and test whether they fall inside your concession, and resist classmates who agree with you but overstate the case.
Inside the HCAD 8006 Week 5 example
The first sentence states the position. Three paragraphs follow, each giving one ground: joint production by people outside the manager's authority, supported by Glouberman and Mintzberg; measurement built for billing, supported by Iezzoni; and professional authority outside the hierarchy. A fourth paragraph concedes that methods transfer where work is controlled and measured, and uses Radnor and colleagues' finding that lean in health care has largely stayed at the process level as support. One reply accepts that surgical checklists succeeded but argues they fit the conceded exception. The other disagrees with a classmate who wants an entirely separate theory for health care, arguing for adaptation instead.
HCAD 8006 Week 5 rubric: what earns full marks
Position posts are graded on commitment and reasoning. Faculty look for a position stated early and held throughout. Grounds should be distinct and supported, and sources should do specific work. A real concession, handled honestly, distinguishes a mature argument from advocacy. Replies are graded on whether they engage counterexamples directly and keep the position precise, including disagreeing with allies who overstate it. Concise writing that builds an argument in a few paragraphs earns more than a long survey of views. Faculty also value posts whose grounds could be tested, since an argument resting on testable claims invites the kind of response a doctoral seminar needs. Faculty also notice whether the concession is placed where it does the most work, usually just before the conclusion.
Common HCAD 8006 Week 5 mistakes, and how to avoid them
The common weakness is a position post that lists arguments on both sides and concludes that the truth lies in between. Choose. Give reasons that someone could check. Concede the case that hurts your position most, and narrow your claim if you must. In replies, show how a counterexample fits or does not fit your position. Do not accept support that stretches your claim beyond what you can defend. If you have a position you want to argue in your own course, we can draft a post that commits to it and concedes honestly. Keep your grounds to three at most, so each gets real support.
Get a HCAD 8006 Week 5 example written to your instructions
Send the contested question your section posed, the rubric and whatever word ceiling applies to posts. The thread you receive takes a side, numbers its grounds and states its own defeat conditions on the page. A first example is free, drafted from the prompt you hold rather than pulled off a shelf, and the wait runs 24 to 48 hours.
More HCAD 8006 papers and PhD in Healthcare Administration samples
- HCAD 8006 Week 1: Purpose of the Doctorate Post
- HCAD 8006 Week 2: Definitions Paper
- HCAD 8006 Week 3: Theory Critique
- HCAD 8006 Week 4: Scholarly Voice Exercise
- HCAD 8006 Week 6: Annotated Reading Set
- HCAD 8006 Week 7: Positioning Paper
- HCAD 8006 Week 8: Construct Analysis
- HCAD 8006 Week 9: Peer Responses
- HCAD 8006 Week 10: Scholarly Argument Paper
- HCAD 8006 Week 11: Research Interest Statement
- DDHA 9902 Week 5: Findings Statement
- DDHA 8006 Week 5: Claim-Based Literature Appraisal
- DDHA 9901 Week 5: Benchmark Comparison
- DDHA 8103 Week 5: Ranked Risk Register
HCAD 8006 Week 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HCAD 8006 Week 5 sample paper?
The position post on importing management theory into health care is free here.
What position does the HCAD 8006 Week 5 example take?
That management theory from other industries transfers badly into health care for structural reasons.
What are the three grounds?
Outcomes produced by people outside the manager's authority, data built for billing and professional authority outside the hierarchy.
What exception does the post concede?
Work under managerial control and well measured, such as supply chains, scheduling and transport.
How does the post handle the surgical checklist example?
It treats checklists as fitting the exception, because the team is co-located, the steps discrete and the surgeon has agreed.