Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.


Search Results

Chan, Y.C.L. and Hsu, S. (2014). "Performance-Based Compensation and Quality Improvement Plans in Ontario Hospitals", International Journal of Management Accounting Research, 4(1), 1-22.

Abstract This study aims to understand how healthcare organizations adapted performancebased compensation for their executives in response to a quality improvement initiative. In 2010, the Ontario Government in Canada enacted the Excellent Care for All Act 2010 (ECFAA), which requires hospitals to prepare their Quality Improvement Plans (QIPs) and prioritize quality indicators to measure performance; furthermore, the ECFAA requires hospitals to link healthcare executive compensation to QIP performance measures. In analyzing the structure of executive performance pay in 119 hospitals’ 2012/13 QIPs, we find that hospitals employ an average of 5.59 indicators related to the quality attributes of safety (1.79), effectiveness (0.96), access (1.03), patient-centred (1.01), and integrated (0.62) in rewarding executives while they use an average of ten indicators to evaluate performance in quality improvement. We also find that the measures used in determining executive performance pay are high-priority indicators in hospitals’ QIPs. These findings suggest that hospitals link their executive performance pay to their high-priority goals in quality improvement. Most hospitals use the identical set of indicators with equal weights and apply the identical at-risk percentages in determining the performance pay for all executives. The average at-risk pay for CEOs and other executives is 6.10% and 4.25%, respectively, of their base salary. We find that 62 hospitals allow partial performance pay for partial achievement of QIP performance targets to recognize executives’ efforts even though QIP targets are not met. Our study suggests that hospitals align measures used for evaluating quality improvement performance with indicators used for rewarding executives.