23 July 2014
Benet Middleton
General assembly 19 July 2014
Write up of morning session on Governance Report

What would change?
The attendees were asked to identify one thing that would be different if UKCP were operating in
the way they would like. The facilitator has grouped the comments under some broad headings
below:
Raised profile
and influence
for UKCP
“UKCP to have a greater profile in… [?] speak out in linking social/political issues
(eg immigration polices – benefit cuts) with mental wellbeing”
“Greater publicity competing with BACP and BABCP”
“Better known outside”
“well known”
“An organisation that promotes itself and supports its members”
“have more political influence and voice in Nice guidelines (more political clout in
this work)”
“Greater voice to Government and public”
“politically engaged and responsive to what’s going on in mental health”
“Other psych’s would think better of it – ie colleagues”
“Be confident”
Related to the
“The organisation that publicises psychotherapy as a gold standard”
above were
Raising the profile as the quality standard for mental health support”
various
“Higher status for Psychotherapy”
comments on
“The leading organisation for public to come to as/when feeling the need for
promoting
support”
psychotherapy
“Promoting psychotherapy more effectively to government agencies”
“UKCP would discover its intellectual passion about the identity of psychotherapy”
There were a
“Transparent”
range of
“Cleaner and more transparent processes with less obfuscation”
comments
“Transparency of: decision making process; communication; organisational
about the need structure”
for
“The process of decision making will be clear and all parties will follow it efficiently
effectiveness,
and effectively”
clarity,
“easier to get decision made”
transparency
“Clarity over who to go to, to answer queries”
and greater
Simpler and more focused on psychotherapy”
simplicity
“Transparent, clarity, invisibility”
“Simplification”
“Clarity of role and function”
“Clearer/simpler regulatory framework re Accred/Reaccred etc
“Effective”
“Change to a let’s do it culture from let’s think about it”
“the general air of frustration and impotence would be lessened”
“I would understand the thrust of the organisation and its values”
“clear transmission of policies from the top (exec) through the organisation so that
every member understands UKCPs position”
Closely related
“get out of the way just maintain the register”
were comments “less regulation”
on UKCP’s role
“Trade union style able to give advice to OMs ... [?]...and support psychotherapy
1
23 July 2014
and structure
Several
comments
related to the
need for
greater
agreement and
less in fighting
Relationship
with members
and ability to
listen was
raised
Benet Middleton
perspective”
“The issue of/notion of organisational members would disappear!”
“Member services”
Splitting roles of membership organisation and regulation – clearer accountabilitybetter democracy”
“Membership cards [?]”
“At leadership level there is one person focusing on DE and voice of membership in
this” [assume Diversity and Equality]
“Make it easier to get individual registration”
“Non- members to do the reaccreditation”
“We would be able to reach consensus/agreement and make the changes we
want to”
“Move forward together”
“Harmonious interactions”
“More inclusive of modalities rather than each modality just fighting their own
corner”
“Respect between staff and members”
“Less destructive opposition”
“More discussion about different modality [and?] emphasis on overall
development”
“Organisation I’d trust to understand if I needed support”
“Less geocentral? More support for regions”
“Genuine enfranchisement of members”
“In touch initial listening is difficult – like now”
“There would be a seamless journey from training to expert members in modality
protected groups”
Following a presentation on the governance report the group were asked two questions:
1.
What do you think of the report?
 Where do you agree or disagree with the report?
2.
What does your table believe are the priority areas or issues to address? (Either in the report
or not)
 Can you make recommendations on these?
 Can you rank them in order of importance?
The report
The facilitator asked for an indicative show of hands (this was not a general meeting and was not
making a formal decision) on the following two options to enable the Board to decide their next
steps:
 The report is fine as far as it goes – but there is more that is required
 We should rip the report up and start again
There was a clear majority of those in the room who supported the former but with a number of
people in favour of starting again. This view was repeated again the prioritisation exercise with a
number of people indicating they would like the process to start again. It is probably a fair
representation of the group that while overall they would support the report – this was only be on
the understanding that more fundamental questions are addressed.
2
23 July 2014
Benet Middleton
Priority areas
The facilitator then asked people over their lunch break to indicate where they felt the priority areas
lay for further action based on the table feedback. Participants were given red dots for those areas
they supported and blue dots for the areas they thought were less important or they didn’t like.
They were given more red dots than blue ones to encourage a more productive focus. There were
no rules as to how the dots were used ie someone could put several dots by one issue. In some way
this may be a clearer indication of the room’s feelings than any specific comments made during the
discussion.
The table below tries to group these together – the separation indicated by the questions has been
ignored for this exercise. Of course there are different ways that these issues could be grouped – for
example, while issues of diversity and equality came further down the list of priorities – they clearly
relate directly to communication and trust. Likewise issues relating to defining the public interest
could be seen as directly related to representational issues.
Looking at where the votes fell the following appear to be the top five priorities of those in the
room:
 Direct members
 The role of colleges
 Representation issues
 Promotion of psychotherapy and of the UKCP
 Issues around communication, trust and culture.
There appeared to be little consensus on the issues during the discussions and the spread of blue
dots indicates that some issues are seen as less important or liked less.
Table of priorities grouped around headings
Issue or priority
Direct Members
Direct members – sort this out
Direct members/individual membership
Direct members where do they fit in?
Review direct members
Missing from the report – the issue of direct members
Issues of representation, reaccreditation and financial concerns of direct
members
Colleges and modalities
Creating distinction between role and function of UKCP as a regulatory body
and our membership of each modality. Modalities as Faculties not
membership bodies with UKCP generic standards as the only regulatory
standards
Lack of coherence across colleges in standards
Standardisation challenge
What is the role of the colleges?
Structure – Colleges? What for? Tribal and cumbersome
Colleges feel alienated
Senses of disconnection – colleges are... [?]..on the periphery
3
Like
20
10
3
Like less
12
7
7
3
2
4
16
2
2
2
11
1
1
23 July 2014
Benet Middleton
Colleges and faculties – implications? What is the conflict of interest?
Sort conflicts between colleges and centre – increase the feeling of
representation between the colleges and the board
Should colleges have more power and resources?
Should we reduce the number of colleges?
Colleges do we need them? How can you regulate and punish under one
structure. Colleges provide shape.
Should we increase the ability of colleges to function appropriately?
Structure - colleges
Colleges and modalities
Promotion of psychotherapy and UKCP
Promote the business of psychotherapy in the world in competition with
other organisations particularly the BACP, the BABCP and the BCP
Public profile
Promotion of UKCP standards in eg NHS
What is the marketing plan?
Promotion of psychotherapy and psychotherapists
Marketing
Psychotherapy is good. It is a safe place that the public can benefit from. We
give lots of cheap or free time compared to say lawyers
Psychotherapy is an art a science and a craft
Brand promotion
Representation issues
How can we strengthen different views at the top and representation at the
top
Not just about regulation, needs to include scope voices from consumers and
members…
…eg develop a parliamentary democracy
Annual conference with voting rights
Shift focus to putting more emphasis on UKCP being a representative voice
for members – guidance as well as regulation
Getting members involved in campaigning and engaged in discussions about
campaigns
Forum for debate(on larger scale) eg Joint college meeting
Forum for debate – loss of AGM
Two way mutuality and dialogue between UKCP and it members
Better communication and trust
UKCP, its OMs and Colleges need to respond to changes in the outside world
more quickly and more effectively – and convey the information to members
more effectively
Develop a sense of being one organisation – review of what working well and
what is not working well. Better two way communication between UKCP and
colleges
Report doesn’t address the functionality that exists in the organisation or
trust building
Policy needs to be thought through at all levels before it is implemented – eg
reaccreditation of direct members
Engagement with public, press and media – generated and included views of
members to include OMs taking a stronger role as well as IMs
Trust and communication are the most important issues
4
8
3
3
9
3
1
2
7
9
7
9
6
2
2
2
4
5
2
16
2
1
7
3
2
5
5
12
4
3
5
1
2
23 July 2014
Benet Middleton
Tackle cultural issues – eg modalities integration
Pay attention to stakeholders
Structure and decision making
Simplifying structure
Clarify decision making process
Need clear lines of reporting upwards and downwards
Clear strategy will help us move forward
The role of the CE in running the organisation
Separating the role of the CE and chair and especially the “running” of the
organisation including the finance function
BACP - Centralised board, no modality issue, not diverse
Use the governing structure that is empowered to govern
Should we be a charity?
Structure of UKCP; are we using the right model – for eg social enterprise,
business model, trading arm?
Consideration of volunteer work versus paid work in the UKCP structure
Psychotherapy council – is it a good forum? Can it ever be?
Psychotherapy council function
Regional presence – psychotherapy council doesn’t work – need for member
representation
Member services and support
Membership enfranchisement and services
Members – more services; enfranchise the members; competitive offer;
friendly organisation; pay attention to stakeholders
Quality CPD events
Important the UKCP promotes itself (one view that the report is unnecessary
and we need to put more time and effort into PR
Members interests – in terms of making a living
Provide me with more support, guidance and clients
Support advice and help to members
Trainees and practitioners are not being prepared enough for the external
world of work – improvements in training
Need for seamless career cycle:
NHS versus private practice, what does private practice mean in comparison?
Member services and support
OMs
Duplication of function across colleges and OMs
Clarify and strengthen OM representation in structure
Missing from the report – the role and position of OMs in relation to the
overall structure
UKCP supporting training organisations
OMs to open up their CPD to all registrants - mutuality and respect between
modalities and recognising parity of other registrants both individual and
organisational.
Diversity and equality
Strengthen diversity and embed into the culture, structure and work of the
organisation
Diversity, equality and inclusion – not enough needs to inform everything we
do
Also – diversity is missing from the report – no mention of the Diversity
5
7
8
2
2
1
3
1
7
3
2
2
1
1
2
5
10
1
2
2
2
1
7
3
2
5
1
4
3
1
6
5
1
6
1
23 July 2014
Benet Middleton
Committee and how we embed diversity into the structure, functioning and
output of the organisation
Defining the public interest
What is the public interest?
Perception of the public interest includes psychotherapists
Public benefit is that it regulates. Provides trained identified psychotherapists
UKCP external affairs responds to both public interest and member interests
Our focus and strategy
What are our objectives
Is the UKCP serving three masters? Members, the public, self-regulation
Professional Association versus regulator - tension
Write our objectives on more documents
Outcome measures
Our regulatory role
UKCP as Gas safe – just be regulator/register
Consolidation of the regulatory framework
Regulatory role
Important UKCP is seen by public as credible
[?]
Setting our standards
Report
Useful to have report as long as appropriate action is taken
The report is as good as far as it goes – but there is a need to go further
If public effectiveness is a key issue, is governance the most important thing
to address in the report
Support for a clearer governance structure, report seems thorough, positive
(possibly not radical enough)
A more fundamental view of the shape is required
Have a radical approach start again
Addresses the status quo
Recommendations for change
Report. Good – assumed fit for purpose or should we start again? Could we
be more radical?
Useful report, sensible, Do what you do better (and comply with law)
Don’t just add – simplify
CPJA structure offers good alternative to report 1
Specifics
Website
FaT
IAPT
Ambassadorial roles
Costs
6
1
9
2
5
14
2
1
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
17
2
1
6
2
1
1