Case Analysis 1: Multistate Health Corporation Essay
Case Analysis 1: Multistate Health Corporation
Describe MHC’s strategy in terms of market position. Also, identify the type of external environment MHC is operating in and the degree to which the strategy matches the environment.
In this particular case study of the Multistate Health Corporation their business strategy alignment was not well suited for that of the market. They decided to focus on two objectives that would give them success and deter away from the “oversupply of bed space.” One of the objectives were to focus on technology. “The strategic planners departed from the previous strategy, opting to become a leader in the development of new health care technologies and procedures” (Effective Training 51).
The other objective that they decided to align with was to improve their efficiencies in their healthcare and outpatient services. The cause of this new direction for MHC is due to the changing environment of the healthcare system and the pressures that they were receiving from the federal and state government. In order to stay competitive with other healthcare facilities, they need to be proactive and adjust their business strategies to the needs of the environment.
Identify the type of structure MHC currently uses in its primary businesses. Describe the fit between the structure and the competitive strategy. Describe any structural adjustments MHC should make to maximize the effectiveness of the strategy.
The way that the Multistate Health Corporation is organization is through a three-tier hierarchy. At the top of the organization is the President and CEO of the company. Underneath this position there are three regional EVPs that report to the President and CEO. Within the three regions they have their own staff that is employed across several hospitals within those regions.
With the new adjustments that they are making the increase in technologies and a new focus on outpatient services, they should really readjust the organizational hierarchy by including a Research and Development sector that would be implemented across all of the regions instead of each region creating new technologies. This would definitely maximize the effectiveness of the new competitive strategy that could be instrumented more quickly and efficiently.
Identify any areas where current management KSAs are not aligned with effective implementation of the competitive strategy.
There seems to be contrasting opinions in regards to the HRPS Objectives. There are three different organizational levels that had outlooks on the current situation. The first organizational level is on the corporate level, regional as the second, and divisional as the third level. The regional and divisional level felt that improving the selection and searching process was the top objective of this strategy; however, corporate felt that creating and utilizing career development was the top priority. Here are two different precedents that levels within the organization feel is the most important. Their outlook for developing this new strategic plan are not in synced with one another and may cause future predicaments in implementation and development of the plan.
Another issue that has seems to involve the current management is the KSAs of these employees. “No system for evaluating the KSA required for a CEO in one part of the corporation compared with that of another. For example, the CEO in Grand Rapids has a different responsibilities compared with a CEO in Detroit, but no one at the corporate level knows what the differences are” (Effective Training 53). This is going to pose a problem because not everyone is on the same page and the competencies of these positions are not consisted between regions. There needs to be a certain set of KSAs and responsibilities based on a certain position throughout the entire organization, not based on a particular region. Having all employees equipped with the same competencies makes them more marketable within the organization.