Reference no: EM133336069

A Pushback on Building

Charlotte Danson pulled her car into the hospital parking lot early on Tuesday morning in between a line of protesters marching in a circle with signs and wearing signboards that read "Stop the building expansion," "Protect our neighborhood," "Money for health programs, not for building," "Hire nurses, not for monuments." She wondered what had happened since last night's meeting in front of the city planning board with the hospital attorney where there were a few questions but little pushback from the mayor, the head of the planning board, or the other six members of the committee. She was a little surprised that the planning committee voted, and it passed four to two, but it was a positive outcome, so she and the attorney left, pleased for the support. As Charlotte got out of her automobile, she realized that she had a significant problem. She saw a news truck pulling into the hospital with a film crew. The Hospital Project Cheshire Hospital is located in a major metropolitan area and has slightly more than 500 inpatient beds with a range of medical and sur-gical specialties. In recent years, the community in which it is located has begun to gentrify as the area has seen an influx of increasingly high-tech businesses located in what were formerly large factory facilities that have been renovated. As a result, much of the housing stock is also undergoing significant renovation, and there is a dramatic renovation in the area. Largely, this transition has favorably affected the hospital's patient mix, as it had for several decades served a more disadvantaged population and been primarily a Medicare and Medicaid population. The hospital is now experiencing a transition to a small but increasingly growing percentage of a younger and more privately insured population. However, there is still a transition and, to some degree, still some tension within the neighborhood as formerly older housing stock is being renovated and individuals and families who have long called the area their residence find they can no longer afford to live in the neighborhood. Many community action groups have become more vocal in recent years in support of living issues and called on politicians and others to support the rights of tenants, seniors, and families in terms of their needs of a part of the city that they have called home.

Four years ago, Cheshire Hospital recognized two important factors. First, there was an increasing need to recognize that ambulatory and outpatient service was going to be an ever-growing importance to the hospital's service mix. Secondly, the neighborhood, in fact, was no longer in decline but rather had been reinvigorated by new businesses and a new generation of residents who wanted to be closer to downtown as was evidenced by the changes in businesses and housing. These forces led to a building plan for a major outpatient facility of significant size that would also include a major expansion and relocation of the outpatient surgery center. A key requirement of this building plan was that it would require closing a street that ran north and south through the neighborhood and necessitate reloca-tion of traffic patterns. There were other parallel streets. This requirement was necessary as the hospital campus was too constrained for additional expansion. It would also require the hospital to demolish two larger apartment buildings instead of allowing for their possible renovation. These apartment buildings had gone into disrepair, and there had been discussion of turning them into mixed housing units by the hospital at one time, but now, it would be necessary to take over that space for the hospital's expansion plans.

The Hospital Meeting Shortly after Charlotte had gotten into her office, her administrative assistant came in and said, "The Board Chair is outside and wants to see you." With a brief pause, Anne Sibley walked in and said, "Charlotte, this is not a good situation. I have gotten calls since last night. How did this explode? We heard your plans for the last few years on this project, we all approved them, and it all seemed buttoned up. But this seems like a landmine has now exploded, and now instead of doing something positive, we have people walking a line in front of the hospital and the television stations and newspapers calling me up for comments. We need to get in front of this now." "I just got in," said Charlotte. "We got a positive vote last night at the city planning board. There was not much discussion. Give me some time to meet with my team so we can get a plan together and figure out how we even got here. I agree with you." As Anne walked out, she said, "Call me by lunchtime, please. We need to communicate with the rest of the board. I'll send them an email to hold off talking to the media until we get out some talking points, but we both agree this is not good, and I am not sure how we got here."As Anne left, Charlotte put a call into her chief marketing officer and public relations director and asked them to come into her office as soon as possible. Charlotte realized she needed to analyze this situation and provide a perspective to the CEO and an approach to address this burgeoning problem.

This case describes a scenario familiar to many hospitals who have found themselves in a metropolitan or urban area that is transitioning. As the hospital develops plans around the hospital change with a revitalization of housing stock, there is a growing tension between longterm residents, rising home prices, and a revitalization of neighborhoods that often results in existing or long-term residents finding themselves facing dislocation. As the case describes a scenario in which the planning board had approved a plan, the situation turned into a public relations problem overnight, and the CEO was found facing a major public relations problem that was spiraling out of control. The issue this case poses is how to address the problem. The challenge or the problem is one of stakeholder identification as a major priority.

After reading the case study and Chapter 1 of your textbook, answer the following questions in a word doc.

1. Who are the critical stakeholders in this project? (Primary? Secondary?)

2. Which ones were engaged inappropriately?

3. What should have been the priority for this project to not have a public relations crisis?