Last summer, the hospital’s executive board decided to initiate an internal research. The final straw? A crisis in the pathology department. The Registration Committee for Medical Specialists withdrew the accreditation of the pathology education program at MUMC+, citing an unsafe learning and working environment. According to De Limburger, which published a report in May about the “reign of terror” of Axel zur Hausen, head of the pathology department, the hospital leadership “ignored, tolerated, and downplayed numerous signals from the confidential adviser about intimidation, bullying, and threats, particularly toward residents (physicians in specialist training).” The executive board stated last month that it “explicitly distanced itself” from these claims, arguing that independent investigations had shown that the media allegations were not based on facts.
Maastricht University made a remarkable move in this case. Axel zur Hausen is a professor at UM, and despite the hospital placing him on compulsory leave after the Limburger publication, Dean Annemie Schols said earlier to Observant that he could “simply” continue his scientific research at the Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences. Unlike the hospital, the faculty had “received no signals or reports” of inappropriate behavior. The dean therefore saw no reason to launch an internal investigation into the professor. This is striking, especially given that MUMC+ and the university are working toward administrative integration, with a joint strategy and far closer collaboration than is currently the case.
Survey
Through the study conducted by Boston Consulting Group, the hospital leadership sought to determine whether the issues were limited to incidents or whether there were deeper, structural problems. A survey was completed by four thousand hospital employees - half of the total workforce - and researchers also conducted individual and group interviews. Although many staff members find their work meaningful, value their autonomy, and experience strong cooperation within many teams, there is still much work to be done. Overwork is often regarded as normal, and employees feel insufficiently recognized by their managers, the report states. In addition, the organizational setup of MUMC+, with unclear decision-making authority and structures, fosters distrust and leaves many with little hope that things will truly change. People feel unheard. Another problem: close-knit network patterns that cause some employees to feel excluded.
Ivory Tower
The executive board is accused of residing in an ivory tower. Language and manners are overly formal and hierarchical. A quote from an (anonymous) employee in the report reads: “Letters from the executive board still begin with ‘Esteemed learned sir…’. Many managers even have an anteroom where you have to wait first.” Another quote: “It’s such a hierarchical organization—being a professor is what earns you appreciation, and only then do you get your own office.” Due to frequent leaks to the media, the executive board has become cautious and less transparent in its communication. According to the researchers, this attitude trickles down through all levels of the organization.
One of the many general recommendations by Boston Consulting Group is that trust and social safety should become a key priority for MUMC+ and a permanent item on the board’s agenda. According to chair of the executive board Helen Mertens, the report provides “a solid basis for a joint approach,” as stated in a press release. She also describes it as “confrontational.”
Her colleague Gabriel Zwart, responsible for finance, is stepping down from his position with immediate effect. With many changes needed in the near future, he is making room for new people, according to his internal statement. “Each of us, starting with the executive board, bears the responsibility to ask how best to contribute to this.”
Wendy Degens