EDITORIAL
Editor in Chief Ian Peate Editor/Associate Publisher Julie Smith [email protected] Deputy Editor Aysha Mendes da Mata [email protected] Subeditors Daniel Davies [email protected] Vicqui Stuart-Jones [email protected] Commissioning Editor Sue Woodward Group Classified Director Rachel McElhinney [email protected] Circulation Director Sally Boettcher [email protected] Commercial Manager Andrew Iafrati [email protected] MedEd Manager Tracy Cowan [email protected] Classified Sales Executive Harry Nolan Production Manager Jon Redmayne Production Assistant Larry Oakes Editorial Make-up Lindsey Butlin Publisher Anthony Kerr Chief Executive Officer Ben Allen UK PERSONAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES
Quarterly Direct Debit Annual Direct Debit Annual Credit Card 2yr Annual Credit Card 3yr Annual Credit Card
£42 £164 £173 £294 £415
Subscribe online: www.magsubscriptions.com, Subscribe by phone: +44 (0) 1722 716997 MA Healthcare Ltd is part of the Mark Allen Group
www.markallengroup.com The British Journal of Nursing is published by MA Healthcare Ltd, St Jude’s Church, Dulwich Road, London SE24 0PB Tel: 020 7738 5454 Editorial: 020 7501 6716 Sales: 020 7501 6726 Email: [email protected] Websites: www.britishjournalofnursing.com © MA Healthcare Ltd, 2014. All rights reserved. No part of the British Journal of Nursing may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission of the Publishing Director. The British Journal of Nursing is a double-blind, peerreviewed journal. It is indexed on the main databases, including the International Nursing Index, Medline and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) ISSN 0966 – 0461 Print: Pensord Press Ltd, Blackwood, NP12 2YA Distribution: Comag Distribution, West Drayton, UB7 7QE Cover picture: iStockphoto.com
The paper used within this publication has been sourced from Chain-of-Custody certified manufacturers, operating within international environmental standards, to ensure sustainable sourcing of the raw materials, sustainable production and to minimise our carbon footprint.
British Journal of Nursing, 2014, Vol 23, No 7
Private-sector management solutions
T
he operational independence of the NHS is being promoted in a number of ways by the current government, while at the same time ensuring that it remains politically accountable. The Secretary of State has made it known that he holds no candle for either NHS or private-sector providers when deciding what is best for patients. The private sector, he states, is able to provide the levels of clinical treatment and care that are equal to those found in the NHS. There may be some scope in attracting managers from the private sector into the NHS. It might be suggested that some NHS managers have become institutionalised, too comfortable, too set in their present ways. Proposals have been made to consider private-sector executives coming into the NHS under fast-track training as a way of bringing in ‘fresh pairs of eyes’. This is what may be needed to prevent a repeat of events that occurred at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust and other failing or poorly performing NHS Trusts. There are criticisms and concerns at such plans too. Chief among them is that such a measure is one of the first steps towards privatising the health service. Although such anxieties are understandable, there may be some mileage in this ‘fresh eyes’ initiative. A blended approach is what may be needed—a combination of both private and public-sector managers. The managers from both sectors bring with them their own wealth of expertise, and by recognising this potential contribution and using it in the best possible way, it could work to the advantage of both patients and staff. The approach could avoid the risk (actual and potential) that an NHS trust becomes too inward-looking as a result of being dependent on a single management style delivered by managers from only one sector, be it private or public. Of course, there is also the potential risk when managers come in from both the private and NHS sectors that there could be too many cooks spoiling the broth, as well as incongruous management styles, resulting in further organisational dysfunction. The possible upshot for those who use services, and those who provide them, is that they will be trapped in the middle. With new management teams comes change, which, for some, could be significant. Restructuring may again be the order of the day. How much more restructuring NHS organisations can take remains to be seen. If turnaround is needed—and this is the case for those trusts that are currently
functioning under ‘special measures’—the benefits of bringing in experts from the private sector to work with NHS managers may be worth serious consideration. Yet the contribution that NHS managers make must not be denigrated. For example, they have established their ability to make key contributions in the field of clinical governance and compliance. Many of them have also shown an ability to work and produce positive outcomes in the face of conditions and systems that have been conspiring against them. The skills needed to do this cannot, and should not, be understated. A fresh set of eyes may assist in providing a management team that is even more all-encompassing and refined in its approach. If private-sector and NHS executives do work in harmony, then there is a chance that much learning can take place, helping the service to grow and become even more responsive. All managers and all management systems need to have flexible boundaries. If they don’t, there is a definite risk of management myopia, along with tunnel vision. There is whole spectrum of possibilities available with a management system comprising both NHS and private-sector staff. The skills and experience that can come from other sectors of the industry should be used fully to ensure that patients are truly at the centre of all we do, and that staff are treated with respect and acknowledged for the work they carry out. We all need to work smarter and not harder, drawing on the expertise of other health and social-care sectors. In this sense, I don’t think that private-sector solutions need be seen as yet another nail in the NHS’s coffin. New talent should not be perceived as the privilege of one sector and not the other; the sharing of expertise for the common good has to prevail. The NHS should be looking to take full advantage of any potential solutions that are available to it, or become available to it, with the primary objective of enhancing care and making the best use of human and physical resources. In so doing, it should be reminded that new talent can be found Ian Peate in both the private and the Editor in Chief BJN public sectors. British Journal of Nursing
349
British Journal of Nursing. Downloaded from magonlinelibrary.com by 130.194.020.173 on November 22, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. . All rights reserved.
Editor in Chief Ian Peate Editor/Associate Publisher Julie Smith [email protected] Deputy Editor Aysha Mendes da Mata [email protected] Subeditors Daniel Davies [email protected] Vicqui Stuart-Jones [email protected] Commissioning Editor Sue Woodward Group Classified Director Rachel McElhinney [email protected] Circulation Director Sally Boettcher [email protected] Commercial Manager Andrew Iafrati [email protected] MedEd Manager Tracy Cowan [email protected] Classified Sales Executive Harry Nolan Production Manager Jon Redmayne Production Assistant Larry Oakes Editorial Make-up Lindsey Butlin Publisher Anthony Kerr Chief Executive Officer Ben Allen UK PERSONAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES
Quarterly Direct Debit Annual Direct Debit Annual Credit Card 2yr Annual Credit Card 3yr Annual Credit Card
£42 £164 £173 £294 £415
Subscribe online: www.magsubscriptions.com, Subscribe by phone: +44 (0) 1722 716997 MA Healthcare Ltd is part of the Mark Allen Group
www.markallengroup.com The British Journal of Nursing is published by MA Healthcare Ltd, St Jude’s Church, Dulwich Road, London SE24 0PB Tel: 020 7738 5454 Editorial: 020 7501 6716 Sales: 020 7501 6726 Email: [email protected] Websites: www.britishjournalofnursing.com © MA Healthcare Ltd, 2014. All rights reserved. No part of the British Journal of Nursing may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission of the Publishing Director. The British Journal of Nursing is a double-blind, peerreviewed journal. It is indexed on the main databases, including the International Nursing Index, Medline and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) ISSN 0966 – 0461 Print: Pensord Press Ltd, Blackwood, NP12 2YA Distribution: Comag Distribution, West Drayton, UB7 7QE Cover picture: iStockphoto.com
The paper used within this publication has been sourced from Chain-of-Custody certified manufacturers, operating within international environmental standards, to ensure sustainable sourcing of the raw materials, sustainable production and to minimise our carbon footprint.
British Journal of Nursing, 2014, Vol 23, No 7
Private-sector management solutions
T
he operational independence of the NHS is being promoted in a number of ways by the current government, while at the same time ensuring that it remains politically accountable. The Secretary of State has made it known that he holds no candle for either NHS or private-sector providers when deciding what is best for patients. The private sector, he states, is able to provide the levels of clinical treatment and care that are equal to those found in the NHS. There may be some scope in attracting managers from the private sector into the NHS. It might be suggested that some NHS managers have become institutionalised, too comfortable, too set in their present ways. Proposals have been made to consider private-sector executives coming into the NHS under fast-track training as a way of bringing in ‘fresh pairs of eyes’. This is what may be needed to prevent a repeat of events that occurred at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust and other failing or poorly performing NHS Trusts. There are criticisms and concerns at such plans too. Chief among them is that such a measure is one of the first steps towards privatising the health service. Although such anxieties are understandable, there may be some mileage in this ‘fresh eyes’ initiative. A blended approach is what may be needed—a combination of both private and public-sector managers. The managers from both sectors bring with them their own wealth of expertise, and by recognising this potential contribution and using it in the best possible way, it could work to the advantage of both patients and staff. The approach could avoid the risk (actual and potential) that an NHS trust becomes too inward-looking as a result of being dependent on a single management style delivered by managers from only one sector, be it private or public. Of course, there is also the potential risk when managers come in from both the private and NHS sectors that there could be too many cooks spoiling the broth, as well as incongruous management styles, resulting in further organisational dysfunction. The possible upshot for those who use services, and those who provide them, is that they will be trapped in the middle. With new management teams comes change, which, for some, could be significant. Restructuring may again be the order of the day. How much more restructuring NHS organisations can take remains to be seen. If turnaround is needed—and this is the case for those trusts that are currently
functioning under ‘special measures’—the benefits of bringing in experts from the private sector to work with NHS managers may be worth serious consideration. Yet the contribution that NHS managers make must not be denigrated. For example, they have established their ability to make key contributions in the field of clinical governance and compliance. Many of them have also shown an ability to work and produce positive outcomes in the face of conditions and systems that have been conspiring against them. The skills needed to do this cannot, and should not, be understated. A fresh set of eyes may assist in providing a management team that is even more all-encompassing and refined in its approach. If private-sector and NHS executives do work in harmony, then there is a chance that much learning can take place, helping the service to grow and become even more responsive. All managers and all management systems need to have flexible boundaries. If they don’t, there is a definite risk of management myopia, along with tunnel vision. There is whole spectrum of possibilities available with a management system comprising both NHS and private-sector staff. The skills and experience that can come from other sectors of the industry should be used fully to ensure that patients are truly at the centre of all we do, and that staff are treated with respect and acknowledged for the work they carry out. We all need to work smarter and not harder, drawing on the expertise of other health and social-care sectors. In this sense, I don’t think that private-sector solutions need be seen as yet another nail in the NHS’s coffin. New talent should not be perceived as the privilege of one sector and not the other; the sharing of expertise for the common good has to prevail. The NHS should be looking to take full advantage of any potential solutions that are available to it, or become available to it, with the primary objective of enhancing care and making the best use of human and physical resources. In so doing, it should be reminded that new talent can be found Ian Peate in both the private and the Editor in Chief BJN public sectors. British Journal of Nursing
349
British Journal of Nursing. Downloaded from magonlinelibrary.com by 130.194.020.173 on November 22, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. . All rights reserved.
