From Implementation Towards Change Management: A Plea for a Multi-stakeholder View on Innovation Implementation; Comment on “What Managers Find Important for Implementation of Innovations in the Healthcare Sector – Practice Through Six Management Perspectives”

Document Type : Commentary


1 Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium

2 Department of Family Medicine and Population Health (FAMPOP), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

3 Former McKinsey & Company, Amsterdam, The Netherlands


In their 2021 paper, Palm and Persson Fischier focus on the enabling factors that can facilitate innovation implementation, specifically the step of moving from idea generation to implementation in a healthcare context. The authors address the lack of concretisation of theoretical perspectives related to the implementation of innovations and hence propose to work holistically with six management perspectives. Our commentary provides new interdisciplinary angles to the six perspectives, from management and organisation literature to theory of change management. This provides future innovation managers with different viewpoints and inspires creative thinking and reflection. Our commentary also critiques the emphasis on the enablers and hence a constructionist-based approach to change management. We plea that a focus on the ‘good, bad, and ugly’—or rather all moods of change—is warranted in order to support holistic and successful change.


  1. Keller S, Aiken C. The Inconvenient Truth About Change Management: Why it isn’t Working and What to do About it. McKinsey & Company; 2009.
  2. Kotter JP. Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harv Bus Rev. 1995;73(2):44-56.
  3. McKinsey Quarterly. Organizing for Successful Change Management: A Mckinsey Global Survey. London, UK: McKinsey & Company; 2006.
  4. Palm K, Persson Fischier U. What managers find important for implementation of innovations in the healthcare sector - practice through six management perspectives. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021. doi:34172/ijhpm.2021.146
  5. Badampudi D, Wohlin C, Petersen K. Experiences from using snowballing and database searches in systematic literature studies. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. Nanjing, China: Association for Computing Machinery; 2015:1-10. doi:1145/2745802.2745818
  6. Lehoux P, Roncarolo F, Silva HP, Boivin A, Denis JL, Hébert R. What health system challenges should responsible innovation in health address? Insights from an international scoping review. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8(2):63-75. doi:15171/ijhpm.2018.110
  7. van Olmen J, Marchal B, Ricarte B, Van Damme W, Van Belle S. The need for a dynamic approach to health system-centered innovations: comment on "What health system challenges should responsible innovation in health address? Insights from an international scoping review." Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8(7):444-446. doi:15171/ijhpm.2019.25
  8. Potter C, Brough R. Systemic capacity building: a hierarchy of needs. Health Policy Plan. 2004;19(5):336-345. doi:1093/heapol/czh038
  9. Gosling J, Mintzberg H. The five minds of a manager. Harv Bus Rev. 2003;81(11):54-63.
  10. Mintzberg H. Structure in Fives: Designing Effective Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1993.
  11. Sicotte C, Champagne F, Contandriopoulos AP, et al. A conceptual framework for the analysis of health care organizations' performance. Health Serv Manage Res. 1998;11(1):24-41. doi:1177/095148489801100106
  12. Aghina W, De Smet A, Weerda K. Agility: It Rhymes with Stability. McKinsey Quarterly. December 1, 2015, Accessed February 13, 2022.
  13. Kerasidou A, Bærøe K, Berger Z, Caruso Brown AE. The need for empathetic healthcare systems. J Med Ethics. 2020;47(12):e27. doi:1136/medethics-2019-105921
  14. Scott CD, Jaffe DT. Survive and thrive in times of change. Train Dev J. 1988;42(4):25-28.
  15. Keller S, Price C. Organizational Health: The Ultimate Competitive Advantage. McKinsey Quarterly; 2011.
Volume 11, Issue 12
December 2022
Pages 3118-3124
  • Receive Date: 25 February 2022
  • Revise Date: 18 June 2022
  • Accept Date: 20 June 2022
  • First Publish Date: 21 June 2022