Summary OfThe Merger Of Two Competing Hospitals

The second is to consider that costs in California heath care are rising and California hospital costs was based on price competition that was created by the process of selective contracting according to researchers which has also resulted in the threat to patients. Thus the factors that play a decisive role in the health care strategy are "expenses to patient volume, case-mix, hospital specialization, hospital size, ownership, location," (Zwanziger; Melnick; Bamezai, 1994) and such factors. The hospitals that are going to be compared are the Irvine Medical Center, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, and the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.

Based on my analysis, both organizations do not have the capacity to manage change, however, out of the two, Middleboro Community Hospital is a little better. Both organizations are suffering from drastic leadership changes where people are either retiring or leaving. Having a strong leadership is the first step towards change management and both do not have that. MCH, however, has the support of its Board of Trustees due to their keen involvement in the operations of the hospital. The executive team meets with the President weekly and tours the hospital. Whereas, at Webster Hospital the team meets twice a month. MCH leadership and Board of Trustees are more involved and collaboratively work on the strategic plan. Webster Hospital is at OMC’s

This week’s case looks at the critical situation occurring at Riverview Regional Medical Center located in Etowah County, Alabama. The medical center, located near a strong competitor, is run by a veteran in the hospital management market, Mr Matt Hayes. Hayes is actively in the process of developing new ideas and revolutionary steps in an attempt to remain competitive in the market and regain profitability. The overall performance of Riverview Regional Medical Center appears to have decreased throughout multiple departments except outpatient surgical procedures, outpatient CT imagining, MRI imagining and inpatient MRI scans.

Unfortunately, although antitrust agencies are paying attention to recent court actions against mergers, the FTC investigates only 1-2% of consolidations (McCanne, 2014). It is also important to remember than public payers such as Medicare and Medicaid set prices to physicians and hospitals with no room for negotiating and conversely private insurers may use their market-share leverage to negotiate reimbursements. Integrative care in the form of hospital consolidation has been shown to reduce costs by 10-20% but this cost has not been shown to produce a cost savings to private insurers (Cutler & Morton, 2014).

Total 244 horizontally merged hospitals were analyzed and compared to more than 3500 short term general hospitals which were the basic data in 1986. The basic data, which were two/third of all U.S. short-term general hospitals before the merging period. Merging hospitals showed that they tended to merge in the areas with market concentration and higher HMO acceptance. Mergers were more likely to be owned private owners and wanted to be one member of the system, and they became bigger after merging in terms of a number of beds and high rate of acceptance. Generally, the results of the study were very positive. In the merged hospitals, both mean service price and cost of the organization were about 7% less than non-merged organizations during

It was interesting to read about the potential merger between Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) due to the increased rise in healthcare economics in the mid-1980s and early-1990s. I do agree that the vision of the Harvard Medical School dean of merging the five major hospitals to curb the healthcare costs was a good idea but definitely not an ideal idea due to the fact of how big of an idea it was. Also, it was a proposal that definitely would cause friction between the fiercely competing entities. IF that was surely done, then that would have been one impressive undertaking to see how five prominent hospitals in the region came together as one. Another interesting thing I took away from the readings was how Harvard Medical School was affiliated with almost all the hospitals – whether they were private, public or community-type – in the region. The five hospital merger would definitely have given even a bigger leg up for Harvard Medical School than before. It does make me wonder if the dean wanted to do it more for healthcare economic crisis that was happening or to build the brand name even bigger or both.

The organizational effectiveness is very critical and possesses many challenges to the hospital managers. The reforms in health care industry have tried to ensure that the quality of service improves provided the low costs. The hospital quality is ensured when there are fewer errors and the patients are satisfied from the services he received. In any hospital, not only the drugs and methods of treatment matter but also the organizational culture. The health care system in USA has seen many reforms from the time in Clinton to Obama. These reforms were effective yet there are gaps that need to be filled. Filling these gaps would mean that the uninsured patients will also get insurance. There are many theories for organizations and any of these can be helpful in improving organizational processes. There are theories that focus of organizational resources, strategies, values, norms and relationships. I believe that strategic and institutional theories of organizational effectiveness will suit the health care industry better in order to meet the challenges of the time. Else, if the challenges of the industry are not met, the costs will be uncontrolled and the managers will find it harder to offer quality health care services. The health care industry needs reforms in operations as well as culture.

The employees are supposed to have alarming beliefs and questionable attitudes toward the merger and if those attitudes do not get properly managed, it will badly affect the company’s performance. The most questionable attitude in this case could be employee’s perception toward management decisions as it could a sense of uncertainty within them. They become more sensitive to their future as any uncertain thought about company’s decisions and actions could let them thin that their job is at stake. Thus staff turnover is quite probable as no employee could thrive in uncertain work environments. Differences in opinions, either professional or technical could also result in employees’ frustration and developing angry attitude resulted by genuine work complaints (Nelson, D. & Quick, J., 2006)

These revolve around the question of where do operations need to be integrated, and where the merging businesses can carry on separately. To answer this work with four decision principles (Harding, D. and Rovit, S. 2004). 1) Plan for ownership. Launch integration plans months prior to the deal being publicly announced. Link decisions to the deal's in-vestment thesis and to the synergies and cultural issues identified. Integrate quickly in critical areas. 2) Target areas for integration based on the investment thesis. Mergers aimed at creating economies of scale require almost seamless integration. However, mergers aimed at product extension, customer and geographic scope require selective integration. 3) Put culture high on your leadership agenda. Managers of merged organi-zations need to retool their corporate culture to fit with the deal's investment thesis. Tools include hard tactics-organizational structure, incentives compensation and the di-vision of decision-making authority-to address cultural integration. 4) Retain key re-sources in the core businesses. Mergers can exert a gravitational pull on employees. Keep the talented focused on taking care of business. Develop a plan to maintain key employees and protect the customer base. Effective integration generally ranks as the single most important factor influencing the success of a deal (Harding, D. and Rovit, S.

Another example of an unsuccessful merger involves internet giant America Online (AOL) and media conglomerate Time Warner. The merger deal occurred in 2000 and is still known as the largest and worst merger deal in American business history at $165 billion. The deal was presented as an equal merger but AOL, holding more valuable stock, essentially acquired Time Warner which resulted in AOL owning 55% of the new company. The proposed vision of the merger was that combining the businesses would benefit from the synergies in technological infrastructure, consumer reach, and operations. The merger was to give Time Warner the ability to digitize its content and reach out to a new online audience. As a trade-off, AOL wanted to access Time Warner’s cable systems, giving rise to innovative broadband capability and additional content to provide to it 27 million subscribers. By 2002, the companies experienced a net loss of nearly $99 billion. By 2010, the companies cut their losses and separated indefinitely. Reasons for the unsuccessful merger can be traced back to the inability to correctly evaluate organizational compatibility as well as the poor execution of growth strategies. Because of economic downturns during the period of merging, both companies experienced a decrease its advertisers and subscribers. This only escalated through a clash in business cultures as executives and employees resisted implementing the new growth strategies put in place. There was also a negative

The merging between two competing companies often results in increase in their market power. Although the merging of two top competitors and the giants in the market can raise suspicious activities, this isn’t the case in our scenario. The merging has being to the advantage of the customer who is always the top priority in the market industry. Although the merging has significantly boosted the quality of the package provided to the customer to produce a more robust package, the price of the product has remained the same at $3.00 per piece and in some instances; most of the products are being sold at a discount (Ravenscraft & Scherer, 2011). There are also more options for the customers to choose from and settle for the most

Every merger is demanding on individuals at all levels of the organizations involved (Appelbaum, Gandell, Yortis, Proper, & Francois, 2000; Buiter & Harris, 2013). In addition to the financial perspective, there are many parts that must be managed during a merger, including people and processes (Appelbaum et al., 2000; Buiter & Harris, 2013; Mackenzie &

Companies should keep in mind that after the merge there will be some synergy between companies and there will be growth for the after the merger because of the companies will continue to work. Also the market power will increase and the big company after the merger will have easy access to resources. There are also some cross-border advantages for mergers too.

From analysis over 200 hospitals in Southern California from 2010-2014, I have found that the varying sizes of the hospitals have a significant impact of the facilities’ expense composition. There were three primary expenses that seemed to have a strong correlation with each other and hospital size: Salaries expense, Purchased Services, and Other General expenses. Taking note of these factors have not only show their impact, but will help hospitals realign their financial objectives to ensure they have continuing success.

For around 25 shares of Re 1 of CBoP, an investor will get one share of Rs 10 of HDFC Bank. In last two days, share price of CBoP moved from Rs 49.85 on Wednesday to Rs 56.40 on Friday. However, it seems, investors of HDFC Bank did not like the development. The share price of HDFC Bank on Thursday moved up from Rs 1,534.50 to Rs 1,543. But on Friday, it fell sharply to Rs 1,475. Prior to this, in August 2007, CBoP was merged with Lord Krishna Bank.