Backgrounds Introduction
Recently, a lot of manufacturers, particularly in the auto or aerospace industries, are willing to take good use of C.P.I. (Continuous Performance Improvement) (Julie Weed, July 10, 2010) to gain a great benefit, such as Toyota. In this ‘Hospital Case’, we want to figure out whether C.P.I. is fit for hospital’s operation. We also would like to know who can finally make the decision, who can seriously affect this decision and who will be influenced by this decision. In order to know these, firstly, in the political perspective, we will map and distinguish the different stakeholders and their stated and root interests. Secondly, based on these interests, how much power do these stakeholders have to affect this decision and where are these powers from. Thirdly, find the supporters and blockers and analyse how to let the different stakeholders ‘Buy-in’ and finally build coalitions.
In this case, initially, the supply system at Seattle Children’s Hospital was so unreliable, ineffective and inefficiency. Ms. Mattesws, a nurse in the intensive care unit, was not the only one figure out that it is not convenient for her to get the medical tools timely because of the disorder and shortage of the tools’ stock-age (Julie Weed, July 10, 2010). But recently, ‘it took Ms.Matthews just a few seconds to find the specialized tubing she needed to deliver medicine to an infant recovering from heart surgery’ (Julie Weed, July 10, 2010). This is the positive result of a new supply system, which is the only one special part of Continuous Performance Improvement. Continuous Performance Improvement is a program “which can examines every aspect of patients stays at the hospital, from the time they arrive in the parking lot until they are discharged, to see what could work better for them and their families (Julie Weed, July 10, 2010).” Therefore, the main goal of