有人在吗,有人在乎吗?高级心理领导的经验和重要性

Q4 Psychology Clinical Psychology Forum Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.53841/bpscpf.2023.1.363.86
Dale Huey, Irini Verbist, Abbie Robinson, Rachel Domone, Paul Campbell
{"title":"有人在吗,有人在乎吗?高级心理领导的经验和重要性","authors":"Dale Huey, Irini Verbist, Abbie Robinson, Rachel Domone, Paul Campbell","doi":"10.53841/bpscpf.2023.1.363.86","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper summarises key literature relevant to senior leadership in the NHS and how that relates to the conditions required to deliver high quality psychologically informed healthcare. Despite the increasing demand for psychological services from the public as well as the increased centrality of psychological approaches in policy, this has not translated into optimizing the leadership for the most effective delivery of these services. The need for psychological leadership is not mandated nor otherwise embedded in the most senior decision-making structures from NHS England, through Integrated Care Boards, to provider organisations such as Foundation Trusts. In this study, we have focused on the latter and surveyed the views of 355 psychological professionals on their knowledge, experience, and the perceived importance of the level of influence of their Chief Psychological Professions Officer (CPPO). The term CPPO is used to refer to the most senior psychological professional in an NHS structure. The role provides overall professional leadership for psychological professions and the strategic leadership and vision to support the rapid expansion of psychological approaches described in the NHS Long Term Plan. We found a consistent difference between the experience, and perceived importance, of the level of influence the CPPO has in relation to: addressing gaps in psychological provision (9 per cent believing their CPPO has a great deal of influence over this issue, versus 60 per cent believing that it is important for their CPPO to have a great deal of influence); developing care to better align with the knowledge base (10 per cent experience, versus 54 per cent perceived importance); and workforce retention and growth (8 per cent experience, 58 per cent perceived importance). We also summarise qualitative comments given as reasons for the preferred degree of influence, opinions on the most important issues for CPPOs to address, and for experience and preferences re communication with the CPPO.","PeriodicalId":39686,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Forum","volume":"201 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is there anybody there, does anybody care? Experience and perceived importance of senior psychological leadership\",\"authors\":\"Dale Huey, Irini Verbist, Abbie Robinson, Rachel Domone, Paul Campbell\",\"doi\":\"10.53841/bpscpf.2023.1.363.86\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper summarises key literature relevant to senior leadership in the NHS and how that relates to the conditions required to deliver high quality psychologically informed healthcare. Despite the increasing demand for psychological services from the public as well as the increased centrality of psychological approaches in policy, this has not translated into optimizing the leadership for the most effective delivery of these services. The need for psychological leadership is not mandated nor otherwise embedded in the most senior decision-making structures from NHS England, through Integrated Care Boards, to provider organisations such as Foundation Trusts. In this study, we have focused on the latter and surveyed the views of 355 psychological professionals on their knowledge, experience, and the perceived importance of the level of influence of their Chief Psychological Professions Officer (CPPO). The term CPPO is used to refer to the most senior psychological professional in an NHS structure. The role provides overall professional leadership for psychological professions and the strategic leadership and vision to support the rapid expansion of psychological approaches described in the NHS Long Term Plan. We found a consistent difference between the experience, and perceived importance, of the level of influence the CPPO has in relation to: addressing gaps in psychological provision (9 per cent believing their CPPO has a great deal of influence over this issue, versus 60 per cent believing that it is important for their CPPO to have a great deal of influence); developing care to better align with the knowledge base (10 per cent experience, versus 54 per cent perceived importance); and workforce retention and growth (8 per cent experience, 58 per cent perceived importance). We also summarise qualitative comments given as reasons for the preferred degree of influence, opinions on the most important issues for CPPOs to address, and for experience and preferences re communication with the CPPO.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Forum\",\"volume\":\"201 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpscpf.2023.1.363.86\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpscpf.2023.1.363.86","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文总结了与NHS高级领导相关的关键文献,以及如何与提供高质量心理知情医疗保健所需的条件相关。尽管公众对心理服务的需求越来越大,心理方法在政策中的中心地位也越来越高,但这并没有转化为优化领导,以最有效地提供这些服务。从英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS England),到综合护理委员会(Integrated Care Boards),再到基金会信托基金(Foundation Trusts)等提供机构,对心理领导力的需求既不是强制性的,也没有嵌入到最高层的决策结构中。在这项研究中,我们主要关注后者,并调查了355名心理专业人士对他们的知识、经验和他们的首席心理专业官(CPPO)影响力水平的感知重要性的看法。CPPO这个术语指的是NHS结构中最资深的心理专业人员。该角色为心理专业提供全面的专业领导,并为支持国民保健制度长期计划中所述的心理方法的快速扩展提供战略领导和远见。我们发现,在以下方面,CPPO的经验和感知到的重要性之间存在一致的差异:解决心理提供方面的差距(9%的人认为他们的CPPO在这个问题上有很大的影响力,而60%的人认为他们的CPPO有很大的影响力很重要);发展护理以更好地与知识库保持一致(10%的人有经验,而54%的人认为重要性);劳动力的保留和增长(8%的人认为有经验,58%的人认为重要)。我们还总结了所提供的定性评论,包括首选影响力程度的原因、对CPPO需要解决的最重要问题的意见,以及与CPPO沟通的经验和偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Is there anybody there, does anybody care? Experience and perceived importance of senior psychological leadership
This paper summarises key literature relevant to senior leadership in the NHS and how that relates to the conditions required to deliver high quality psychologically informed healthcare. Despite the increasing demand for psychological services from the public as well as the increased centrality of psychological approaches in policy, this has not translated into optimizing the leadership for the most effective delivery of these services. The need for psychological leadership is not mandated nor otherwise embedded in the most senior decision-making structures from NHS England, through Integrated Care Boards, to provider organisations such as Foundation Trusts. In this study, we have focused on the latter and surveyed the views of 355 psychological professionals on their knowledge, experience, and the perceived importance of the level of influence of their Chief Psychological Professions Officer (CPPO). The term CPPO is used to refer to the most senior psychological professional in an NHS structure. The role provides overall professional leadership for psychological professions and the strategic leadership and vision to support the rapid expansion of psychological approaches described in the NHS Long Term Plan. We found a consistent difference between the experience, and perceived importance, of the level of influence the CPPO has in relation to: addressing gaps in psychological provision (9 per cent believing their CPPO has a great deal of influence over this issue, versus 60 per cent believing that it is important for their CPPO to have a great deal of influence); developing care to better align with the knowledge base (10 per cent experience, versus 54 per cent perceived importance); and workforce retention and growth (8 per cent experience, 58 per cent perceived importance). We also summarise qualitative comments given as reasons for the preferred degree of influence, opinions on the most important issues for CPPOs to address, and for experience and preferences re communication with the CPPO.
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
Clinical Psychology Forum
Clinical Psychology Forum Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Service evaluation of reflective parenting groups: What are parents’ perspectives on the usefulness of RP groups in improving parental mentalisation and reflective functioning? A service evaluation exploring ethnic monitoring in a Specialist Perinatal Mental Health service: Barriers and improvement opportunities Building families through MAR (medically assisted reproduction), donor conception and surrogacy: Where does this fit into clinical psychology? Learning from reflection – good practice in handover with neurodiverse clients Racialised minority women’s experiences of psychological intervention across perinatal and maternal mental health services
×
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