It is appropriate to assess managerial staffs on management efficacy, in addition to professional performance.

In healthcare, professionals are trained that each life and each encounter is way more important than financial considerations.  This axiom, however, may be maintained at the same time when there is consideration about cost-effectiveness balance. In particular, managers who evolve from professional walks need to consider and balance ethically when 3rd party and client resources are deployed.

Each department and manager may begin with cost-benefit considerations explained in another page https://aresleung.org/union-hospital/some-governance-directives/cost-benefit-consideratio/.

Continual assessment on efficiency with resources is based on data ALONGSIDE qualitative impressions, although the latter is no less important.  Trend analyses on headcount, fixture & equipment investment, are useful alongside improvement in throughput and significant synergistic effects.  Investment in one branch may help another arm significantly and cooperation is praise-worthy.  It is important to construct initial and continual forecast on effectiveness of installations.  These forecasts are compared to actual performance over time to indicate accuracy and value for future reference.

Key performance indicators (KPI) are generated by each department.  Traditionally KPIs cover through-put and performance.  These parameters may be extended to cover efficiency.  There is no hard and fast rule, and it is good to be simple and sustainable.  It is important that KPIs are themselves evaluated.  A convenient and non-disruptive tracer mechanism may be borrowed from complaint management in UH.  Complaints and incidents are used as tracers across performance service to identify root causes and design remedy  Likewise, administrative and managerial incidents are used to evaluate management capacity.  KPIs will be examined, in particular reference to why significant pitfalls are covered by KPIs or otherwise.

Central management in UH promotes changes appropriate to current need, and her no blame culture must be maintained alongside.  Departments are given room and access to data for reviewing performance and effecting changes.  A method with proven track-record and minimal disturbance to general performers, is engagement with outlying performance and alignment of them back to norms, alongside recognition to good performance.  In addition, systems take priority over persons.  When new norms are established and they themselves are subject to review, though appropriate use of data and opinion.  Only in this way, our institute stays afloat in the rapids of society changes.