No abstract

IntroductionThere is accumulating evidence implicating the role of leadership in system failures that have resulted in a range of errors in healthcare, from misdiagnoses to failures to recognise and respond to patient deterioration. This has led to concerns about traditional hierarchical leadership structures and created an interest in the development of collective ways of working that distribute leadership roles and responsibilities across team members. Such collective leadership approaches have been associated with improved team performance and staff engagement. This research seeks to improve our understanding of collective leadership by addressing two specific issues: (1) Does collective leadership emerge organically (and in what forms) in a newly networked structure? and (2) Is it possible to design and implement collective leadership interventions that enable teams to collectively improve team performance and patient safety?Methods and analysisThe first phase will include a social network analysis, using an online survey and semistructured interviews at three time points over 12 months, to document the frequency of contact and collaboration between senior hospital management staff in a recently configured hospital group. This study will explore how the network of 11 hospitals is operating and will assess whether collective leadership emerges organically. Second, collective leadership interventions will be co-designed during a series of workshops with healthcare staff, researchers and patient representatives, and then implemented and evaluated with four healthcare teams within the hospital network. A mixed-methods evaluation will explore the impact of the intervention on team effectiveness and team performance indicators to assess whether the intervention is suitable for wider roll-out and evaluation across the hospital group.Ethics and disseminationFavourable ethical opinion has been received from the University College Dublin Research Ethics Committee (HREC-LS-16–116397/LS-16-20). Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals, national and international conferences, and to relevant stakeholders and interest groups.

This paper presents the overall learning process that evolved during the MASCA project (MAnaging System Change in Aviation-EU FP7 funded project (2010-2013), specifically focusing on the one of the key elements of the overall learning approach, the development of a Serious Game (SKYBOARD) and the role the game played in supporting the implementation of Airport Collaborative Decision Making (A-CDM) in a major European airport. The underlying principles of the learning process was based on ongoing and collaborative learning in the workplace, with each phase of learning involving preparation and guidance, collaborative learning, consolidation of that learning and practically focused next steps that can be deployed to support overall change management. The aim of SKYBOARD was to aid communication and collaboration when introducing A-CDM, and thereby supporting the cultural change that comes with this introduction. The development of SKYBOARD was based upon an initial training needs analysis and an iterative development and implementation approach at a major airport. The research demonstrated that we are at the beginning of a fundamental shift in the way both learning and working is happening in organisations. Therefore the establishment of a collaborative learning process and integrated learning package needs to focus on supporting continuous performance improvement and learning (competency and capability at all levels) and to ensure this overall learning is fully aligned to the overall strategic blueprint of the organisation. The evaluation of SKYBOARD demonstrated that Serious Games can support collaborative learning and enhanced communication and that such games should be key resource in any learning environment and proved to be a highly effective support to the implementation of A-CDM in this case.

PurposeThis paper aims to present a case study illustrating the issues involved in the tacit knowledge conversion process and to determine whether such conversion delivers value to the organisation in terms of business value and return on investment (ROI).Design/methodology/approachA single‐case multiple baseline participants experimental design, replicated across two participants, was utilised. Aaron's KM V‐model of evaluation is utilised to determine the ROI of the initiative.FindingsWhile the evaluation of the tacit knowledge conversion initiative suggests positive value to the business; analysis of the conversion process also reveals a number of individual level factors, which reinforce the challenges associated with efforts to access, capture and share expert tacit knowledge.Research limitations/implicationsThe results of this study may stimulate further research on tacit knowledge management processes, and specifically the influence of the individual in the success or failure of these initiatives.Practical implicationsThe paper presents an actual case study situation that reveals the micro‐level issues involved in converting tacit expert knowledge.Originality/valueThe paper addresses three important areas; it makes an effort to focus on tacit rather than explicit knowledge management, it takes steps to evaluate a tacit knowledge management initiative in terms of its tangible business value, and it pays attention to the influence of the individual in knowledge management processes, which are inherently driven by the individual.

No abstract

A Retained Foreign Object (RFO) is a fairly infrequent but serious adverse event. An accurate rate of RFOs is difficult to establish due to underreporting but it has been estimated that incidences range between 1/1000 and 1/19,000 procedures. The cost of a RFO incident may be substantial and three-fold: (i) the cost to the patient of physical and/or psychological harm; (ii) the reputational cost to an institution and/or healthcare provider; and (iii) the financial cost to the taxpayer in the event of a legal claim. This Health Research Board-funded project aims to analyse and understand the problem of RFOs in surgical and maternity settings in Ireland and develop hospital-specific foreign object management processes and implementation roadmaps. This project will deploy an integrated evidence-based assessment methodology for social-technical modelling (Supply, Context, Organising, Process & Effects/ SCOPE Analysis Cube) and bow tie methodologies that focuses on managing the risks in effectively implementing and sustaining change. It comprises a multi-phase research approach that involves active and ongoing collaboration with clinical and other healthcare staff through each phase of the research. The specific objective of this paper is to present the methodological approach and outline the potential to produce generalisable results which could be applied to other health-related issues.

No abstract

No abstract