...
首页> 外文期刊>Human Resources for Health >‘Going private’: a qualitative comparison of medical specialists’ job satisfaction in the public and private sectors of South Africa
【24h】

‘Going private’: a qualitative comparison of medical specialists’ job satisfaction in the public and private sectors of South Africa

机译:“私有化”:定性比较南非公共和私营部门的医疗专家的工作满意度

获取原文
           

摘要

Background There is a highly inequitable distribution of health workers between public and private sectors in South Africa, partly due to within-country migration trends. This article elaborates what South African medical specialists find satisfying about working in the public and private sectors, at present, and how to better incentivize retention in the public sector. Methods Seventy-four qualitative interviews were conducted - among specialists and key informants - based in one public and one private urban hospital in South Africa. Interviews were coded to determine common job satisfaction factors, both financial and non-financial in nature. This served as background to a broader study on the impacts of specialist ‘dual practice’, that is, moonlighting. All qualitative specialist respondents were engaged in dual practice, generally working in both public and private sectors. Respondents were thus able to compare what was satisfying about these sectors, having experience of both. Results Results demonstrate that although there are strong financial incentives for specialists to migrate from the public to the private sector, public work can be attractive in some ways. For example, the public hospital sector generally provides more of a team environment, more academic opportunities, and greater opportunities to feel ‘needed’ and ‘relevant’. However, public specialists suffer under poor resource availability, lack of trust for the Department of Health, and poor perceived career opportunities. These non-financial issues of public sector dissatisfaction appeared just as important, if not more important, than wage disparities. Conclusions The results are useful for understanding both what brings specialists to migrate to the private sector, and what keeps some working in the public sector. Policy recommendations center around boosting public sector resources and building trust of the public sector through including health workers more in decision-making, inter alia. These interventions may be more cost-effective for retention than wage increases, and imply that it is not necessarily just a matter of putting more money into the public sector to increase retention.
机译:背景技术南非的公共部门和私营部门之间卫生工作者的分布非常不公平,部分原因是国家内部的移民趋势。本文阐述了南非医学专家目前对在公共部门和私营部门工作感到满意的地方,以及如何更好地激励他们留在公共部门。方法在南非的一所公立医院和一所私立城市医院进行了74次定性访谈,包括专家和关键信息提供者。对访谈进行编码,以确定财务和非财务方面的常见工作满意度因素。这是对专家“双重练习”(即月光)影响的更广泛研究的背景。所有定性专业受访者都从事双重实践,通常在公共和私营部门工作。受访者因此能够比较这两个领域的满意度,并具有两者的经验。结果结果表明,尽管对专家从公共部门迁移到私营部门有很强的经济诱因,但公共工作在某些方面可能具有吸引力。例如,公立医院部门通常提供更多的团队环境,更多的学术机会以及更多感受到“需要”和“相关”的机会。但是,公共专家遭受着资源匮乏,对卫生部缺乏信任以及感知的职业机会不足的困扰。这些公共部门不满的非财务问题似乎同工资差异同样重要,甚至更为重要。结论结论的结果对于理解专家带来了什么迁移到私营部门以及使某些人在公共部门工作的有用。政策建议的重点是通过使卫生工作者更多地参与决策等方式来增加公共部门的资源并建立对公共部门的信任。这些干预措施在保留方面的成本效益可能比增加工资更具成本效益,这意味着向公共部门投入更多资金以增加保留率并不一定是问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号