驾驭重大制度变革的微观政治:在英国医疗保健系统中实施可持续发展转型伙伴关系。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Health Services Research & Policy Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-14 DOI:10.1177/13558196221142237
Justin Waring, Simon Bishop, Georgia Black, Jenelle M Clarke, Mark Exworthy, Naomi J Fulop, Jean Hartley, Angus Ramsay, Bridget Roe
{"title":"驾驭重大制度变革的微观政治:在英国医疗保健系统中实施可持续发展转型伙伴关系。","authors":"Justin Waring,&nbsp;Simon Bishop,&nbsp;Georgia Black,&nbsp;Jenelle M Clarke,&nbsp;Mark Exworthy,&nbsp;Naomi J Fulop,&nbsp;Jean Hartley,&nbsp;Angus Ramsay,&nbsp;Bridget Roe","doi":"10.1177/13558196221142237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate how health and care leaders navigate the micro-politics of major system change (MSC) as manifest in the formulation and implementation of Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) in the English National Health Service (NHS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comparative qualitative case study of three STPs carried out between 2018-2021. Data collection comprised 72 semi-structured interviews with STP leaders and stakeholders; 49h of observations of STP executive meetings, management teams and thematic committees, and documentary sources. Interpretative analysis involved developing individual and cross case reports to understand the 'disagreements, 'people and interests' and the 'skills, behaviours and practice'.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Three linked political fault-lines underpinned the micro-politics of formulating and implementing STPs: differences in meaning and value, perceptions of winners and losers, and structural differences in power and influence. In managing these issues, STP leaders engaged in a range of complementary strategies to understand and reconcile meanings, appraise and manage risks and benefits, and to redress longstanding power imbalances, as well as those related to their own ambiguous position.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the lack of formal authority and breadth of system change, navigating the micro-politics of MSC requires political skills in listening and engagement, strategic appraisal of the political landscape and effective negotiation and consensus-building.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"233-243"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10515458/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Navigating the micro-politics of major system change: The implementation of Sustainability Transformation Partnerships in the English health and care system.\",\"authors\":\"Justin Waring,&nbsp;Simon Bishop,&nbsp;Georgia Black,&nbsp;Jenelle M Clarke,&nbsp;Mark Exworthy,&nbsp;Naomi J Fulop,&nbsp;Jean Hartley,&nbsp;Angus Ramsay,&nbsp;Bridget Roe\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13558196221142237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate how health and care leaders navigate the micro-politics of major system change (MSC) as manifest in the formulation and implementation of Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) in the English National Health Service (NHS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comparative qualitative case study of three STPs carried out between 2018-2021. Data collection comprised 72 semi-structured interviews with STP leaders and stakeholders; 49h of observations of STP executive meetings, management teams and thematic committees, and documentary sources. Interpretative analysis involved developing individual and cross case reports to understand the 'disagreements, 'people and interests' and the 'skills, behaviours and practice'.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Three linked political fault-lines underpinned the micro-politics of formulating and implementing STPs: differences in meaning and value, perceptions of winners and losers, and structural differences in power and influence. In managing these issues, STP leaders engaged in a range of complementary strategies to understand and reconcile meanings, appraise and manage risks and benefits, and to redress longstanding power imbalances, as well as those related to their own ambiguous position.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the lack of formal authority and breadth of system change, navigating the micro-politics of MSC requires political skills in listening and engagement, strategic appraisal of the political landscape and effective negotiation and consensus-building.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"233-243\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10515458/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196221142237\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/12/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196221142237","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目的:调查英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)制定和实施可持续发展与转型伙伴关系(STPs)时,卫生和医疗领导人如何驾驭重大制度变革(MSC)的微观政治。方法:对2018-2021年间开展的三项STPs进行比较定性案例研究。数据收集包括对STP领导人和利益相关者的72次半结构化访谈;STP执行会议、管理团队和专题委员会的意见以及文件来源。解释性分析包括编写个人报告和跨案例报告,以了解“分歧、人和利益”以及“技能、行为和实践”,以及权力和影响力的结构性差异。在处理这些问题时,STP领导人采取了一系列互补战略,以理解和调和含义,评估和管理风险和利益,纠正长期存在的权力失衡,以及与他们自己模棱两可的立场有关的失衡。结论:鉴于缺乏正式权威和制度变革的广度,驾驭MSC的微观政治需要倾听和参与的政治技能、对政治格局的战略评估以及有效的谈判和建立共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Navigating the micro-politics of major system change: The implementation of Sustainability Transformation Partnerships in the English health and care system.

Objective: To investigate how health and care leaders navigate the micro-politics of major system change (MSC) as manifest in the formulation and implementation of Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) in the English National Health Service (NHS).

Methods: A comparative qualitative case study of three STPs carried out between 2018-2021. Data collection comprised 72 semi-structured interviews with STP leaders and stakeholders; 49h of observations of STP executive meetings, management teams and thematic committees, and documentary sources. Interpretative analysis involved developing individual and cross case reports to understand the 'disagreements, 'people and interests' and the 'skills, behaviours and practice'.

Findings: Three linked political fault-lines underpinned the micro-politics of formulating and implementing STPs: differences in meaning and value, perceptions of winners and losers, and structural differences in power and influence. In managing these issues, STP leaders engaged in a range of complementary strategies to understand and reconcile meanings, appraise and manage risks and benefits, and to redress longstanding power imbalances, as well as those related to their own ambiguous position.

Conclusion: Given the lack of formal authority and breadth of system change, navigating the micro-politics of MSC requires political skills in listening and engagement, strategic appraisal of the political landscape and effective negotiation and consensus-building.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
期刊最新文献
Health care utilization and costs among coordinated care patients in Southeastern Ontario: A difference-in-differences study of a double propensity score-matched cohort. The role of collaborative governance in translating national cancer programs into network-based practices: A longitudinal case study in Canada. How can specialist investigation agencies inform system-wide learning for patient safety? A qualitative study of perspectives on the early years of the English healthcare safety investigation branch. What can the era of big data and big data analytics mean for health services research? Collaborative and integrated working between general practice and community pharmacies: A realist review of what works, for whom, and in which contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1