Discuss the factors which have enabled this group to dominate the other stakeholders. Explain the main arguments which the other groups might have used to promote their objectives.

Part 1: Coursework (80%)

Task

You are required to answer ALL of the questions below based on the following CASE STUDY.

Subang Jaya Memorial Hospital

Management Committee of the Subang Jaya Memorial Hospital was meeting under crisis conditions.  The Hospital had moved into a financial deficit and most of the key participants in the decision making process could not agree on the best way to resolve the crisis.

The Hospital was located in the less affluent part of a Petaling Jaya city. It was a large general purpose hospital which served a stable population. Its revenue came mainly from the central government in the form of a grant, based on the size of population served and the actual surgical and medical work carried out. Central government grants accounted for about 65% of total revenue, and the remainder was almost equally split between two other funding bodies.  Firstly, the local city council provided about RM20 million of grants and secondly, private medical insurance companies paid a similar amount for treatment of their insurance holders.

This gave total annual revenue of some $115 million but costs had risen to $125 million with all parts of the cost structure, including medicines, salaries and materials, seeing increases above the level of inflation.  Unfortunately, the outlook did not look good for the Hospital.

Revenue from central government was under pressure as the government sought to reduce public expenditure in order to fund significant tax cuts. Grants from the city council were linked to the level of the central government grant and consequently revenue from this source was not expected to increase. Even more depressing for the Hospital was its failure to attract private healthcare patients. They were choosing to go to a neighboring hospital with a better reputation for patient care and more attractive facilities. Consequently, income from medical insurance was likely to decline further.

The Management Committee estimated that if the situation did not improve the Subang Jaya Memorial Hospital would have a deficit of $75 million within three years. Action needed to be taken urgently. The Management Committee was made up of a number of coalitions. One was led by Michael Gonzales, the Chief Executive of the Hospital. He was an administrator and an accountant by training. His concern was that the Hospital should be run efficiently. To him, and his fellow administrators on the Management Committee, it was important that the Hospital should be financially viable. However, efficiency and effectiveness are not always the same thing. In fact, some of the actions taken may also lead to further ineffectiveness or inefficiencies elsewhere. An indication of this dilemma was the administrators’ wish to reduce the length of time patients spent in hospital so as to reduce costs.

However, sending patients home early could result in them requiring home visits from nursing staff for up to four or five extra days and in some circumstances this early release might require a re-admission to the Hospital. Consequently, initial savings might be eroded by further unanticipated costs. Furthermore, some medical staff suspected that these administrators were more concerned with short-term financial concerns than with medical ones. Certain medicines may be rationed or withheld to reduce costs and patients might be denied treatments such as physiotherapy or occupational therapy in a similar drive for cost savings.

Another group was represented by Stan Lee, a consultant surgeon. He was in favour of developing “leading edge” micro-surgery. For Stan and his fellow surgeons, the Subang Jaya Memorial Hospital was losing out to its rival hospital because it was seen as old-fashioned and out of touch with modern medicine and surgery. This was affecting its ability to attract the affluent private healthcare patient. Unfortunately, the Hospital would require substantial capital investment to implement such a high-tech medical strategy.

A third group was influenced by the Mayor of the city, Martin Goodman. This group was made up mainly of councillors (local politicians) who sat on various Hospital committees and were anxious to see the Hospital kept open and effectively serving the city’s medical needs.   Surprisingly, the city council had recently threatened to cut back its funding as a means of avoiding an increase in local taxes. The local news media had attempted to embarrass the local ruling party about this policy but the Councillors involved, led by Mrs Fuller, were in no mood to give in to media pressure. There was a real fear that strategy might now be formulated in response to media headlines rather than rational argument.

Naturally the local population in the catchment area of the Hospital wanted it to continue its function as a viable concern and even invest in more modern facilities. Unfortunately, this stakeholder group had little power or influence.

The residents were socially disadvantaged and were unable to bring concerted pressure to bear on the Hospital’s decision-makers. There was one other important pressure group that was very vocal in its support of the Hospital. These were the employees, including the nurses and the general medical and support staff (not the high-ranking surgeons). Their interests were not political or financial, or even professional, unlike the surgeons who were looking to expand their power and influence. This employee grouping was primarily concerned with the maintenance of an efficient and effective hospital for the local population who could not afford private medical insurance and who relied mainly on government funded healthcare provision.

As one might have expected with these divisions, the Management Committee found it difficult to agree on an acceptable strategy to solve the financial crisis. Eventually the one chosen reflected the power wielded by the surgeons. These senior medical staff (the surgeons) had threatened to resign if the Committee did not agree to a capital investment programme designed to enhance the Hospital’s surgical reputation. The Hospital would effectively cease to function without its surgical teams. Unfortunately, the trade-off for this investment was to reduce the number of beds in the Hospital. It was argued that this reduced provision reflected the current utilisation patterns. Unfortunately, this did not reflect the latent demand in the community. There were a significant number of patients who were not being given the treatment they needed as they did not have private healthcare insurance. Furthermore, waiting times for seeing the appropriate consultant surgeon or for being admitted to the Hospital were lengthening for this disadvantaged group of patients.

Required:

(a)	It is apparent that the goals and objectives of the senior medical staff have profoundly influenced the chosen strategy. Discuss the factors which have enabled this group to dominate the other stakeholders. Explain the main arguments which the other groups might have used to promote their objectives. (40 marks)
(b)	Assess the other strategic options open to the Management Committee. (35 marks)
(c)	When dealing with issues concerning health care, financial outcomes are not the only criteria to be considered. Ethical factors must also be taken into account. Discuss the role that social responsibility might play in this context. (25 marks)

Appendix 4a: Undergraduate Grading Criteria for MGT3214 Assignment 1 (August 2018 Semester)

REPORT	Presentation & structure	Use & presentation of Harvard Referencing	Content/ Terms/ Findings/ Definitions/ Calculations	Business Application & Integration of Data/Literature	Discussion /Analysis /Critical evaluation &/or Reflection	Self – Reflections
Task details	Follows report structure & keeps to word limit of 2000 words	Follows Harvard style for in-text citation & Reference List. Use a minimum of 8 sources	Content included – specify task requirements as in coursework guidance	Integration & application of information – from coursework guidance	Line of argument, development of discussion supported with evidence.	Reflects the numerous skills gained from the course and achievable suggestion for future. 500 words.
80-100   Outstanding	Outstanding…  Presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures &appendices. Articulate & fluent academic writing style with ideas cross referenced. No grammatical / spelling errors.	Outstanding… Standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.	Outstanding… Exploration of topic showing excellent knowledge & understanding through thorough & appropriate research. Impressive choice and range of appropriate content.	Outstanding… Business insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data into work.	Outstanding…  Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Highly developed/ focused work.	Outstanding…  Showing excellent knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
70-79   Excellent	Excellent … Presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Articulate & fluent academic writing style. Only a minor error.	Excellent… Standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.	Excellent … Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Evidence of appropriate reading. Covers all relevant points & issues.	Excellent … Business insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data into work.	Excellent…  Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection clearly developing points in the appropriate way with thorough consideration of all possibilities.	Excellent…  Showing excellent knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
60-69   Very Good	Very good…  Presentation & report structure, paragraphing, use of numbering, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Fluent academic writing style. Very few grammatical errors & spelling mistakes.	Very good…  Standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.	Very good… Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Covers most relevant points & issues. Few errors / omissions in content/calculations.	Very good…  Business insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data into work.	Very good…  Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection & a few ideas/points could benefit from further development &/or evaluation/comparison.	Very good…  Showing excellent knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
50-59   Good	Good…  Clear presentation & report structure, use of numbering & appendices. Writing is mainly clear but some spelling &/ or grammatical errors.	Good…  Standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.	Good… Grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented. Knowledge & understanding is demonstrated. Minor errors / omissions in content/ calculations.	Good… Business insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data into work.	Good… Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but more ideas/points could be addressed /developed further.	Good…  Showing excellent knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
40-49   Satisfactory	Satisfactory… Basic report structure. Not always written clearly & has grammatical & / or spelling errors.	Satisfactory… Basic referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.	Satisfactory… Content / level of knowledge of the topic.  Addresses part of the task. Some errors / omissions in content/ calculations. May benefit from further research.	Satisfactory… Business insight & application. Limited integration with literature/ data. Use of literature/data but limited in breadth OR depth.	Satisfactory… Basic evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but some points superficially made so need further development.	Satisfactory…  Basic evidence of knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
30-39   Marginal Fail	Weak… Report format, limited or poor structure. Muddled work with many spelling & / or grammatical errors.	Weak…Use of Harvard referencing system with errors & inconsistently applied. Limited referencing within the text. Limited accuracy of in-text references compared to those in the final Reference list.	Weak… Limited content / knowledge/ calculations. Limited or muddled understanding of the topic/question. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.	Weak… Unsatisfactory evidence of business application & insight Work needs to show better links between practical application and theory.	Weak… Limited evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. More development & comment needed. May need to do more than describe.	Weak…  Limited knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
20 – 29   Clear Fail	Inadequate… Report format and poor paragraphing / signposting. Inappropriate writing style Poorly written &/or poor spelling & grammar.        Must see CASE	Inadequate…  Use of Harvard referencing with many errors &/or inconsistencies.   Must see CASE	Inadequate… Lacking in relevant content/ knowledge/calculations. Content irrelevant / inaccurate. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.	Inadequate… Lacks evidence of business application & insight. Some literature irrelevant to topic.	Inadequate… Lacking / inadequate level of discussion/ analysis/critical evaluation & /or reflection. Descriptive. Must see CASE	Inadequate…  Lacking / inadequate level of knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.
1 – 19   Little or Nothing of merit	Nothing of merit…  Poorly written work, lacking structure, paragraphing / signposting. Many inaccuracies in spelling & grammar.          Must see CASE	Nothing of merit… No or little attempt to use the recommended Harvard referencing system.    Must see CASE	Nothing of merit…  Unsatisfactory level of knowledge demonstrated. Content used irrelevant / not appropriate/ to the topic. Does not meet the learning outcomes.	Nothing of merit…  No evidence of appropriate business application & insight.	Nothing of merit…  Unsatisfactory level of discussion/analysis/critical evaluation &/or reflection Must see CASE	Nothing of merit…  Unsatisfactory level of knowledge & understanding through skills gained from the course with appropriate suggestions. No grammatical / spelling errors.

Appendix 4b: Individual Report Mark and Feedback Sheet

 

Module Code & Title	MGT3214 Business Life Cycle
Topic	Subang Jaya Memorial Hospital	Deadline
Name		ID No.

Please refer to Grading Criteria for Essay when awarding marks (upon 100). Each criteria weightage is given below (X%).

Grading Criteria		X%	Comments / Feedback / Feed Forward
(a). It is apparent that the goals and objectives of the senior medical staff have profoundly influenced the chosen strategy. Discuss the factors which have enabled this group to dominate the other stakeholders. Explain the main arguments which the other groups might have used to promote their objectives.		/40
(b). Assess the other strategic options open to the Management Committee.		/35
(c) When dealing with issues concerning health care, financial outcomes are not the only criteria to be considered. Ethical factors must also be taken into account. Discuss the role that social responsibility might play in this context.		/25
Total (Assessor)	/100
Total (Peer Reviewer/Moderator)	/100
UH Internal Moderator Comments			External Examiner Comments (if applicable)

Marks will be awarded based on the following Criteria:

• Presentation & structure:Follows logical structure with good flow; meet the format requirements outlined in the instruction, articulate and fluent academic writing.
• Use Academic Recourses with Harvard Referencing: Use a minimum of 8 sources; in-text citations done properly and use Harvard referencing style.
• Content: Perform full and rich content including problem, background evidence of research and findings; demonstrated competence and knowledge of the key issues
• Business Application & Integration of Data/Literature: Articulate appropriate and relevant data; clear tables and charts with accurate data to support findings
• Discussion /Analysis /Critical evaluation &/or Reflection: Express a strong, focused argument, well supported by impressive analysis and evidence, provide relevant and achievable recommendations; represents well critical thinking skills

Part 2: Reflection (20%)

Task

You are required, after completing the above tasks in Part 1, to reflect what you have learned relating closely to theories of strategic management, corporate finance, accounting, etc. Support the theories using relevant literature reviews.

Objectives:

The main objective of this exercise is to help students reflect on the work that they have completed (as per Part 1). Students must be able to relate their learning experiences to relevant theories/learning outcomes in the module and their application in the future, whether in a work/study setting. Students also can examine their strengths/weaknesses/challenges while attempting to complete this coursework and what they have done to overcome/exploit them. This reflective essay should not exceed the word limit of 1000 words.

Marking Scheme for

Individual Reflection

The following rubric will be used for the evaluation of the individual self-reflection report. Note that the component areas are listed on the left column, and levels of performance are listed across. This listing can help the student to prepare his/her assignment better.

Components/ Parts	Marks Assigned	Marks Allocation			Marks
Introduction	5 Marks	0-1 Marks	2-3 Marks	4-5 Marks
		Minor elaboration on the whole course.	Good elaboration on the whole course.	Extensive elaboration on the whole course.
Comprehension of knowledge or skills	15 Marks	0-5 Marks	6 – 10 Marks	11- 15 Marks
		Explanation on the comprehension of knowledge / skills is incorrect.	Explanation on the comprehension of knowledge / skills is acceptable.	Explanation on the comprehension of knowledge / skills is impressive.
Problems, issues and constraints. Used appropriate literature reviews to support your points.	15 Marks	0-5 Marks	6 – 10 Marks	11 – 15 Marks
		Relevant problems, issues and constraints provided are rated doubtful.	Relevant problems, issues and constraints provided are acceptable.	Relevant problems, issues and constraints provided are convincing and impressive.
Suggestion and recommendation for improvement	10 Marks	0-3 Marks	4-7 Marks	8-10 Marks
		Suggested improvements are rated average and doubtful	Suggested improvements are acceptable.	Suggested improvements are convincing and impressive.
Conclusion	5  Marks	0-1 Marks	2-3 Marks	4-5 Marks
		Conclusion is rated average and not very impressive	Conclusion is good but raised minor doubts.	Conclusion is well thought, convincing and impressive.
				Marks  (50 Marks)
				Marks (20%)

Learning Outcomes

This assessment satisfies the learning outcomes as specified in your course structure. Students are expected to be able to identify and critically evaluate recent developments in the related area.

Assessment Guidelines

In assessing your work, the examiner is looking for the following academic skills which undergraduates are expected to acquire and demonstrate:

• The ability to analyze – to engage with material, theories and issues in a clear, logical and focused way
• The ability to think critically – to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of an argument or explanation without bias
• The ability to synthesize – to bring together the elements of an argument or explanation and to construct it on appropriate principles and methodologies
• The ability to evaluate – to discriminate between ideas, explanations, theories and concepts and to exercise judgement from a sound basis
• The ability to think creatively – to bring a fresh and independent insight to theories, concepts and issues and to express these efficiently

Secondary Sources of Literature

The literature sources (printed or electronic) that you will be expected to refer to when completing your assignments include

• Refereed academic journals – articles in such publications are evaluated by academic peers prior to publication to assess their quality and suitability
• Other academic journals – such publications normally have an editor and/or editorial board to select articles. The relevance and usefulness of such journals vary considerably
• Professional journals – articles included in such publications are often of a practical nature and more closely aligned to professional (practitioner) needs than those in academic journals
• Books – may be aimed at the academic market or at practicing professionals. It is likely that those with an academic slant will be of most relevance to you
• Newspapers – a good source of topical events and developments

Referencing guidelines:

All literature sources that you refer to in the body of your assignment must be included in the bibliography at the end of your assignment. You are required to comply with the Harvard style of referencing accessible from various websites.

For academic work at third year level of an undergraduate degree, it is expected that a bibliography will contain between ten and fifteen sources. As a MINIMUM the bibliography should include: two refereed academic journals, two professional journals and two academic books

Submission Guidelines

1. Layout

(a)        Media of submission: hard (printed) copy and soft copy (uploaded on Safekeeping) firmly attached to the printed copy submitted.

(b)        The essays should:

• Be printed on A4 paper size, Arial Font, and 11 point font letter size.
• 5 line spacing, top and bottom margin @ 1.0 in, left and right margin @ 1.0 in.
• In addition to the standard Title/Cover-page as provided to your answer, you are required to print your Student Number at the TOP Right-hand Corner of the Title page. State the number of words at the bottom right corner on the cover page.

(c)        ONE Ring Binding on the TOP LEFT Corner:

• 1^st page: Cover Page
• 2^nd page: Individual Assignment Marking Sheet.
• 3^rd page onward: Assignment content
• Final page : Referencing
• Safe assign Similarity Index (<21%) Front Page ONLY

• Late Submission Penalty Clause

The deadline for submission is to be strictly adhered to.  No extension of time will be allowed except in extenuating circumstances i.e. medical reasons.  Students who wish to apply for extension time for submission of assessment item after the due date shall do so by putting in writing the request together with validated documentary evidence to support the application.

2. Plagiarism

Plagiarism is defined as the submission or presentation of work, in any form, which is not one’s own, without acknowledgment of the sources. If a student obtains information or ideas from an outside source, that source must be acknowledged. Another rule to follow is that any direct quotation must be placed in quotation marks and the source immediately cited.

Plagiarism is also defined as copy of all or part of the work of another student(s) of current or previous batch of this University or another higher learning institution. The University’s degree and other academic awards are given in recognition of the candidate’s personal achievement. Plagiarism is therefore considered as an act of academic fraudulence and as an offense against University discipline.