JOHA Archive/Feed

The evolving global healthcare industry is defined by structural shifts toward collective action, as reflected in growing interest in nursing workforce unionization and strikes. Unionization, defined as the formal institutionalization of collective professional representation, has been associated with higher wages, workforce stability, and improved patient outcomes. Yet, the direct causal mechanism linking specific dimensions of union structure to these outcomes remains uncertain. Drawing from three complementary philosophical organizational frameworks, namely, precarious work, social movement framing, and complex adaptive system (CAS) theory, this viewpoint contributes to the nursing workforce and healthcare administration literature by proposing an integrative theory-driven analysis that positions nursing unionization and strike activity as emergent outcomes of interconnected systemic relational processes. It further introduces the concept of representation precarity as a nursing-specific dimension of workforce vulnerability. Subsequently, strike activity, or episodic work stoppage, typically arises from systemic failures in healthcare systems originating at the unit level and when collective bargaining means are exhausted. Labor disputes can manifest as both employer-employee and intra-worker conflicts, often framed as ethical and professional mandates for patient advocacy. Nurse unionization and strike actions may also introduce ethical dilemmas and temporary risks to patient safety, underscoring the complexity of collective action within the nursing profession. Administratively, hospitals must transition from reactive labor management to systemic-relational strategies. From a policy perspective, evolving and inclusive regulatory frameworks are needed to safeguard labor rights while balancing the imperatives of patient care delivery and public safety. Future inquiry is needed to explore direct causal inferences among unionization, strike activity, and patient and system outcomes, and to further investigate the conditions under which dimensions of collective action most effectively advance nursing workforce sustainability.

N/A

N/A

The healthcare workforce crisis in India is a persistent and multifaceted challenge, marked by shortages and an inequitable distribution of skilled professionals, particularly in private tertiary care settings. These gaps directly impact patient safety, operational efficiency, financial performance, and institutional reputation. The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed these systemic vulnerabilities, intensifying staff burnout, attrition, and workforce instability. This review synthesizes global and Indian evidence to develop a strategic, implementable framework tailored to the Indian private healthcare context. Grounded in the Resource-Based View (RBV), the study conceptualizes the healthcare workforce, especially highly specialized tertiary-care professionals, as a strategic asset with Valuable, Rare, Inimitable, and Non-substitutable (VRIN) characteristics. The framework proposes a modernized recruitment playbook that incorporates data analytics, technology-enabled employer branding, and a structured 90-day onboarding program to enhance early retention. It further outlines a four-pronged retention strategy: (1) competitive and context-sensitive compensation, (2) structured career architecture with specialization pathways, (3) leadership-driven engagement and recognition, and (4) work-life integration and well-being initiatives. A phased implementation plan, supported by clearly defined leading and lagging Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), enables translation of strategy into practice. By reframing workforce management as a strategic priority rather than an operational constraint, this study provides actionable insights for hospital leadership. Adopting this integrated approach can help healthcare organizations build resilient, high-performing workforces capable of sustaining quality care delivery in an increasingly complex and competitive environment.

Background: After harmful adverse events, patients and families commonly want timely acknowledgment, a clear explanation of what happened, and assurance that the organization will learn and prevent recurrence. Many health systems have adopted open disclosure policies and Communication-and-Resolution Programs (CRPs) that include apology as a core component. Objective: This scoping review aimed to map the literature on institutional apology practices after healthcare harm, focusing on (1) how apology is defined and implemented in organizational responses, (2) patient/family experiences and expectations, (3) clinician and system barriers to effective apology, and (4) reported outcomes and evidence gaps. Methods: Following the PRISMA-ScR framework, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus from inception to July 2025. We included empirical studies and evaluations describing apology within structured responses to harm (e.g., open disclosure, CRPs, disclosure-and-apology policies), including patient/family perspectives, clinician experiences, and institutional program reports. Results: Fourteen studies were included across North America, Europe, and Australasia, spanning hospitals, pediatric systems, and mixed care settings. Four themes emerged: (1) Apology as a “bundle,” not a sentence, effective institutional apologies were described as multi-step processes (acknowledgment, explanation, responsibility, repair, and follow-up) rather than a single statement; (2) Authenticity and power, patients valued sincerity, specificity, and accountability, while vague or “scripted” apologies often undermined trust; (3) Legal fear and organizational risk management, clinicians and leaders reported tension between transparency and liability concerns, influencing what is said and documented; and (4) Variable implementation and limited evaluation, programs like CRPs show promise for improving communication and resolution, but rigorous comparative evidence on patient-centered outcomes and equity remains limited. Conclusion: Institutional apology is most credible when embedded in transparent, sustained responses to harm, paired with explanation, learning, and nonmaterial restoration. Research is needed to standardize definitions of “effective apology,” evaluate outcomes beyond liability metrics, and assess trauma-informed and equity-oriented implementation.

Background: Increasing concerns over nursing shortages have drawn more attention to nurses’ job dissatisfaction. Job dissatisfaction is a prevalent issue that negatively impacts nurses, patient care, and healthcare organizations. Objective: To clarify the meaning of job dissatisfaction and develop an operational definition of this concept. Methods: Walker and Avant’s method of concept analysis was used as a framework to explore job dissatisfaction. A review of existing literature on job dissatisfaction was conducted using several electronic databases: APA PsycInfo, Business Source Elite, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL). Results: The defining attributes of job dissatisfaction are unpleasant or negative emotional responses toward the work environment and job situation, falling short of expectations and desired needs in the workplace, and feelings of inequity. Work-related stressors and a poor organizational climate are the main antecedents influencing the defining attributes. The consequences of job dissatisfaction affect nurses and healthcare organizations in numerous ways. Conclusion: Developing knowledge of job dissatisfaction in the nursing field would help nurses recognize it and use appropriate interventions to mitigate its impact.