IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

A physician role typology: Colleague and client dependence in an HMO

Listed author(s):
  • Barr, Judith K.
  • Steinberg, Marcia K.
Registered author(s):

    This paper reports on physicians' role definitions in one prepaid group practice, a health maintenance organization (HMO). Colleague and client dependence are reviewed and analyzed as separable dimensions of physician role definitions. Data are derived from documents, interviews, and staff questionnaires collected in 1979-1980. The evidence reported suggests widespread colleague dependence in the HMO. Physicians consulted with one another about patient care and engaged in informal referral and review, developing practice standards; and some of these physicians relied on colleagues for handling their patient visits when needed. In relation to their patients, some physicians viewed themselves as bureaucratic officials relatively dependent on client approval in carrying out their health care activities, while others saw themselves as trusted medical experts in a setting free of nonmedical constraints in patient care. The relationship of organizational structure to these different role definitions is discussed. Classifying these HMO physicians according to a fourfold typology of professional dependence shows that most are Organizational Physicians (Type I), who are both colleague and client dependent. Collegial Physicians (Type II) are colleague dependent and, at the same time, do not perceive clients as demanding. Implications for quality of care and physician satisfaction and turnover are considered.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 20 (1985)
    Issue (Month): 3 (January)
    Pages: 253-261

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:20:y:1985:i:3:p:253-261
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:20:y:1985:i:3:p:253-261. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.