Developing Leadership for Safety
and Quality in Healthcare
NHS Lanarkshire
4 – 6th February 2013
Lead Trainers: Mark Johnston & Emma Levy
Lead Author: Mark Johnston. Evaluator: Mudenda Munkombwe
Reviewers: John McKinlay & Fiona Gailey
Introduction - Since 2009 NHS Education for Scotland through the NES Patient Safety Multi-Disciplinary Group
(NES PSMG) has delivered bespoke training delivery support to NHS territorial boards to support their efforts in
the education of staff primarily involved in the delivery of the Scottish Patient Safety Programme and wider
efforts to make care safer. NHS Lanarkshire asked for our support in the delivery of a workshop to take place in
February 2013.
Aim of the workshop - The key aim communicated to NES was to design and deliver a three day workshop to
support the ongoing deployment of improvement skills across NHS Lanarkshire and to provide further support
to staff involved in leading, developing or implementing quality improvement (QI).
Target audience as defined by NHS Lanarkshire - Senior staff in NHS Lanarkshire who currently lead,
support or are implementing quality improvements within their local areas. Specific staff groups who support
the development of improvement or are recognised as local change agents were also invited.
The workshop was designed in consultation with the host board around core themes of quality improvement
and patient safety; the use of in-board expertise such as SPSP Fellows to deliver sessions was encouraged. A
programme of the day is at appendix 2 to this report.
The learning outcomes for the workshop in the context of building capability were;









Name the four dimensions of Deming's Theory of Profound knowledge
Explain how the "Model for Improvement" can help improve patient safety
Name the key steps involved in the generation and interpretation of data
Describe how taking a "Human Factors" approach can lead to improvements in safety and quality
Describe a tool used to improve communication within teams
Articulate what person centred care means within the core themes of Care Experience,
Leadership/staff experience, Co-production
Explain what a System is and how systems determine outcomes for patients
Explain how a LEAN approach to healthcare can reduce waste and improve patient safety
Apply the knowledge and skills above to design a Person Centred; Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) test of
change, including the selection of appropriate measures.
The following report has been written to provide intelligence on respondents’ reaction, satisfaction, and
engagement with the workshop, which could contribute to a return on investment impact assessment. The
report also aims to highlight issues around capability and capacity building for quality improvement and patient
safety that the board may wish to investigate further. In addition, improvements for the future delivery of such
workshops are identified; these may be of interest to a range of stakeholders.
Mark Johnston - May 2013.
1
Executive Summary
The three day capability building workshop was delivered in partnership
Overall the workshop was rated positively by respondents, with 68% of respondents rating it 4 or 5 (on a 1-5
scale), and the remaining 32% rating it 3. The number of delegates was 21.
90% of respondents declared they would recommend the workshop. Comprehensive evaluation data is at
appendix 1 of this report.
Questions designed to illicit ‘reaction, satisfaction and engagement’ from respondents were included in the
evaluation form with respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing with the following questions as a percentage:
Relevant to my professional practice
85%
Increased my understanding
72%
Met my learning needs
76%
Confident I can apply my learning to my job
70%
Committed to apply learning to my job
85%
Would you recommend
this workshop to a
colleague?
Yes
19
90%
Relevance to their professional practice: A high proportion of respondents at 85% report the workshop as
relevant to their professional practice, suggesting the subject areas were clearly understood as integral to
delivering safer patient care. Evaluation suggests Human Factors and LEAN were highly valued by respondents
and show the highest shift in knowledge and skill pre and post workshop and that learning needs were met for
the majority with a high level of commitment to apply the learning in their roles.
Needs analysis of training requirements: The board may wish to consider some needs analysis to ensure
the correct mix of subjects for a future audience. Also a survey may be useful for the board to understand
attitudes to patient safety. NES can help with this if no in-board support is available.
Subject content: The insufficient time given to complex subject areas such as data interpretation was clear
from qualitative analysis. Fewer subjects to allow for increased time on data interpretation and/or a lower level
of content may have delivered higher levels of satisfaction from those respondents that attended with a desire
to improve their knowledge and skill around data and its interpretation.
Learning points for NES: The training team are encouraged by the high level of satisfaction and engagement
reported by respondents, with face to face learning highly valued. In the spirit of continuous improvement they
acknowledge the lessons for future delivery they take from this report, in particular; pre-workshop needs
analysis, suitable level of content to meet the learning needs of the audience and individual presentation
evaluation data.
2
Main Report
1.
Benefits of training to Respondents




Model for Improvement
Learning about the theories underpinning the Improvement Science Model, Human Factors and
Patient Safety.
Learning how to use tools such as Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA), driver diagrams and run charts to plan
for patient safety and measure improvement within the health service.
Introduction to vocabulary relevant to Patient Safety and Improvement Science.
The learning motivated respondents to think about ways of improving the way they are working for
quality purposes and for safer care of patients.
New Insight into Patient Focus
 The presentation given by NHS Lanarkshire NMAHP Director provided a fresh insight into a more
patient focused way of delivering patient care.
Data Collection
It was useful to understand the purpose of data collection, what data should be collected, and how it
should be analysed.
 Respondents were made aware of available resources to help with data collecting for healthcare
improvement.

Team work and Networking
 The group activities provided an opportunity to work together in teams as would be the case when
planning for either a Patient Safety or QI project.
 Interaction with respondents from other professions or areas of the Health Board was a good
opportunity to network and hear what others are doing in their areas.
2.
Respondents Planned Implementation of Learning









Improvement Science Methodology Tools
Use PDSA to improve patient outcomes in own work area.
Measure improvement changes by using driver diagrams and run charts.
Use tools to improve rehabilitation of frail elderly patients and reduce re-admission.
Apply theory from learning to examine outcomes of existing services and consider change.
Use tools to improve the way we implement new services.
Use learning to improve data collection for improvement.
Mentor staff and encourage them to incorporate Patient Safety and QI methods into their work to
improve patient outcomes.
Communicate testing for change more effectively to staff team so that they are all aware of what they
need to do to contribute to the planned change.
Consider patient perspective when planning for improvement.
Application of other learning
 Introduction of Human Factors into own work.
 Using new networks links for project planning.
3
3.
Respondents suggestions for continued Support from their Health Boards & NES
 Delivering educational workshops, facilitation support and/or advice.
 Access to Quality Improvement Expert (s) either locally or externally to support continued learning and
implementation of Improvement Science learning into practice.
 Protected time to learn allow change to take place.
 Opportunity to be heard and listened to.
 Facilities for data input for data collected for improvement purposes.
 Support required for sharing Improvement Science approach with colleagues in Primary Care, such as
GPs who may not be aware of this approach.
4
Impact of learning on Respondents’ self assessment of knowledge and skill of the
learning outcomes
At the beginning of the workshop respondents were asked to self assess their knowledge and skill level against
the learning outcomes on a scale of one to five, with one being low and five being high. The exercise was then
repeated at the end of the workshop. The data was then collated to produce a percentage score of those
recording scores of four or five before the training and those recording scores of four or five after the training.
The percentage shift was then calculated. The data is at appendix 1 of this report and a summary of findings
follows:
Name the four dimensions of Deming’s Theory of Profound knowledge.
At 38%, this learning outcome showed the lowest shift in self-reported knowledge and skill from before to after
the workshop. The presentation was designed as a ‘scene setter’ to help delegates understand that change
designed to deliver improvement is more than the implementation of a theoretical model, but rather a holistic
approach that pays attention to the psychology of change, the system as a whole, variation of process and the
need to apply different models to address different challenges.
No delegates reported skill in this subject above 3 on the five point scale before the workshop and although the
number of those recording above 3 after the workshop was low, those remaining at 1 or 2 on the five point
scale were low (19%) post workshop. No negative qualitative comments were recorded so I believe this reflects
the complexity of the subject matter and the ability of the respondents to link the concepts to the other
subjects delivered over the three days. For future workshops, this would be better broken into its four parts
and linked more clearly to relevant content as opposed to a standalone topic.
Explain how the ‘Model for Improvement’ can help improve patient safety.
After the training, there is a significant shift at the highest level where previously only 1 respondent reported a
score of 4 or 5 on the 5 point scale; after the training this has increased to 9 respondents. This suggests that the
training achieved its learning outcomes.
I recommend further follow up training for respondents to ensure the methodology used in the SPSP, the
model for improvement is understood. The Quality Improvement (QI) Hub has recently developed e-learning
resources to enhance learning of QI methodologies; these can be accessed on-line at the QI Hub website1.
Future workshops may benefit from respondents accessing these resources before attending. In addition Dr
Paul Bowie et al on behalf of the NES Multi-Disciplinary Patient Safety Group has published a study that
identifies and summarises the implementation and contextual factors that may influence the effectiveness of
Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycles. The study can be accessed from the NES homepage2. Future training in PDSA
will look to incorporate the recommendations of this study and future revisions.
Name the key steps involved in the generation and interpretation of data.
The training team feel that although respondents report increased knowledge, with a 43% shift, greater time
was needed to cement knowledge for the participants. Qualitative statements included comments that ‘the
sessions were too quick’ that it was ‘too technical’ and that ‘it was done at the wrong time of the day, with not
enough time to think through’. Other respondents however, rated this section highly and commented on its
usefulness in the qualitative comments.
1
http://www.qihub.scot.nhs.uk/education-and-learning/qi-e-learning.aspx
2
Healthcare Improvement and Rapid PDSA Cycles of Change: A Realist Synthesis of the Literature
5
There was some specific criticism of the training delivery of this session and the training team have taken that
on board. For multi-disciplinary audiences I would recommend completion of the relevant QI Hub module or a
lower level of detail for face to face delivery unless a pre-workshop needs analysis reveals a desire for high
level data interpretation training. Following this event, Emma Levy of NES in partnership has developed a
workshop (currently in pilot phase) called Skills for Improvement (Measurement) which allows for greater time
on this important subject. Until it is available I recommend that participants are encouraged to access the
resources on the QI hub highlighted. If additional training is required in data interpretation for NHS
Lanarkshire, a bespoke session can be arranged to ensure focus and learning.
Describe how taking a ‘Human Factors’ approach can lead to improvement in safety and quality
At 76%, this learning outcome showed the highest shift in self-reported knowledge and skill from before to
after the workshop. This shows a positive impact of the training on the respondents’ as their understanding of
the learning outcome increased.
From the pre-workshop evaluation data, this audience had very low levels of awareness of human factors and
its usefulness in reducing harm across the service. Senior management and improvement leads may wish to
consider some needs analysis work is carried out across NHS Lanarkshire to determine if this is reflective of the
wider workforce or an isolated pocket. Further awareness level training may be necessary for the wider
workforce.
Describe a tool used to improve communication within teams.
Communication is frequently highlighted as a contributing factor in many patient safety errors resulting in
harm. Efforts in the service to improve communication currently revolve around the use of standard briefing
tools such as Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendations (SBAR), pre-operative briefing, surgical
checklist/pause and handover briefing templates. Reported levels of knowledge and skill before the workshop
were low with a shift post workshop of 52% of respondents reporting knowledge and skill of the learning
outcome of 4 or 5 on the 5 point scale. This shows that the training had a significant impact in increasing the
knowledge and skill of respondents for this learning outcome.
Articulate what person centred care means within the core themes of Care Experience;
Leadership/Staff experience; Co-production.
Responses before the training show a high concentration of respondents indicating knowledge and skill at the
low levels. After the training, the responses showed that a higher number of respondents were indicating
higher levels such that the recorded shift to 4 or 5 on the 5 point scale of knowledge and skill of the learning
outcome post workshop was 62%. This showed that the training had successfully shifted the knowledge levels
of most respondents from lower levels to higher levels of knowledge and skill for this learning outcome. As one
of the three NHS Scotland Quality Ambitions, senior management and SPSP leads may wish to consider that
this subject be included in future workshops either as a standalone subject or as a theme running through
other subjects.
Explain what a System is and how systems determine outcomes for patients.
Errors resulting in harm are frequently the result of systemic failures. An ability to view the whole system
particularly from the perspective of the patient is beneficial in securing service improvement. Responses before
the training show a high concentration of respondents indicating knowledge and skill at the low levels. After
the training, the responses showed that a higher number of respondents were indicating higher levels such
that the recorded shift to 4 or 5 on the 5 point scale of knowledge and skill of the learning outcome post
workshop was 52%. This showed that the training had successfully shifted the knowledge levels of most
respondents from lower levels to higher levels of knowledge and skill for this learning outcome.
6
Explain how a LEAN approach to healthcare can reduce waste and improve patient safety.
Combined with knowledge and understanding of the whole system, an appreciation of LEAN offers the
opportunity to reduce wasteful and harmful variation. This subject had the joint highest levels of reported
knowledge and skill pre-workshop and the joint highest level of reported knowledge and skill post-workshop
with an overall shift on the 5 point scale to a self-assessed rating of 4 or 5 of 67%
Analysis of the qualitative data shows that while one respondent felt that ‘too much information was given in
too short a time’. The overwhelming feeling was positive with one delegate committed to applying LEAN
methodology in the workplace and another to using LEAN to improve their own efficiency. Senior management
and improvement leads may wish to consider additional LEAN workforce training for improvement leads.
Apply the knowledge and skills above to design a Person Centred, Plan-Do-Study-Act test of change,
including selection of appropriate measures.
At 62% this learning outcome showed a significant shift on the five point scale. Qualitative feedback suggested
that this session was highly valued by respondents and that they can apply their knowledge of the Model for
Improvement to plan tests of change to their work processes.
7
Recommended Improvements for training delivery
1.
Pre-workshop information: Respondents felt that documentation received before the workshop did
not have enough information about the workshop content and its level. While suggested reading
resources were sent to NHS Lanarkshire contacts before the workshop for circulation; some
respondents felt unfamiliar with key concepts and definitions. The pre-workshop information should
clarify the level of the target audience. The Quality Improvement curriculum framework3 has identified
different levels of competence which might be a useful guide for targeting future audiences and where
the focus of the training is generic QI skills.
2.
Audience targeting: Completion of pre-evaluation forms is an issue for training teams who require
this information to better inform the training content for workshops. Participants should be strongly
encouraged to complete such evaluation forms in advance of the workshop; training teams will be able
to identify issues that may be resolved by focused pre-workshop reading or on-line learning.
3.
Delivery Time: Some respondents felt the workshop was rushed in places. Respondents complained
that their breaks and time to ask questions were compromised to ensure the timetabled content was
delivered. From the qualitative responses it is not possible to determine if this was a complaint
reflective of the three days or the day when the fire alarm went off and caused considerable impact on
the session and those following.
Unfortunately this had an impact on respondents assimilating the learning from the more complex
topics, which from the evaluation suggests that some respondents felt more time for teaching was
required. The time compromise also meant that respondents had less time for networking, reflection of
learning and group activities.
4.
Fluency of delivery: Although NES trainers were excellent speakers and helpful, respondents felt that
compared to NHS speakers, NES speakers sometimes lacked fluency in some of the topic areas. There
were times when trainers appeared confused or unsure about what they were saying. Examples of
respondents’ statements included: “Did not understand NES speakers”; “NHS speakers easier to
understand”; “Some areas were difficult, presenters seemed unsure of topic”; “handouts wrong”. NES
trainers have taken on board these messages and taken action accordingly.
5.
Room Arrangement: Respondents complained that it was difficult to hear colleagues’ speaking
because of the size and layout of the room. There was also a complaint that the room was cold. While
trainers did check with respondents from time to time if the room temperature was comfortable and if
they could hear what trainers and others were saying, clearly this was a significant issue for many.
3
http://www.qihub.scot.nhs.uk/education-and-learning/qi-curriculum-framework.aspx
8
Conclusions
There is always a temptation with workshops such as this to deliver as much as possible but under-estimate the
time required for assimilation of learning. This is particularly true of multi-disciplinary audiences of mixed
knowledge and understanding.
With 90% of respondents declaring they would recommend the workshop and 68% of respondents rating it 4
or 5 (on a 1-5 scale), and the remaining 32% rating it 3, overall the workshop was received positively. With the
implementation of the recommendations above, future workshops should result in an even greater level of
satisfaction.
Next steps

NES is cascading a survey to elicit workforce needs in respect of patient safety education. NHS
Lanarkshire SPSP programme manager (Diane Campbell) and other professional and educational leads
will be a recipient of this survey for onward cascade to colleagues. This survey or a shorter version of it
may be suitable in determining the educational needs of NHS Lanarkshire staff and how best NES can
offer support.

Mark Johnston in partnership and sponsored by the NES Patient Safety Multi-Disciplinary Group (NES
PSMG) has created a one day workshop entitled ‘Educating for Patient Safety’. Aimed at those within
the service who have patient safety education as part of their remit, the workshop allows delegates to
network and access standard educational resources to help cascade learning to front line staff. Further
details and dates can be accessed from the NES Patient Safety Multi-Disciplinary Group4.

The NES Training Development Support Unit (TDSU) has a portfolio of generic skills courses that have
for the last ten years been delivered to doctors in training across NHS Scotland. Some of these courses
may be useful in complementing and enhancing learning from patient safety and quality improvement
education. Of particular interest for this audience I believe would be Persuasion skills, Human Factors
and Leadership and Safety Culture. These courses and others will become available for booking via NES
Portal during 2013/2014. Further details can be found on the NES Patient Safety Multi-Disciplinary
Group training page5. Local training expertise with a remit to develop others will be able to access
training packs to deliver these sessions in-house in due course.
Mark Johnston – May 2013
Training & Research Officer
NHS Education for Scotland
mark.johnston@nes.scot.nhs.uk
4
http://www.nes.scot.nhs.uk/media/1958378/flyer_v1.pdf
http://www.nes.scot.nhs.uk/education-and-training/by-theme-initiative/patient-safety-and-clinical-skills/learningopportunities/training.aspx
5
9
Appendix 1 – Evaluation data
% of respondents
rating 4, 5 preworkshop
0%
5%
5%
0%
10%
Learning Outcomes – Self assessed average score of all respondents knowledge/skill
Name the four dimensions of Deming's Theory of Profound knowledge
Explain how the "Model for Improvement" can help improve patient safety
Name the key steps involved in the generation and interpretation of data
Describe how taking a "Human Factors" approach can lead to improvements in safety and quality
Describe a tool used to improve communication within teams
Articulate what person centred care means within the core themes of Care Experience,
Leadership/staff experience, Co-operation
Explain what a System is and how systems determine outcomes for patients
Explain how a LEAN approach to healthcare can reduce waste and improve patient safety
Apply the knowledge and skills above a design a Person Centred, PDSA test of change, including
selection of appropriate measures
4, 5 postworkshop
% Shift
38%
62%
48%
76%
62%
38%
57%
43%
76%
52%
5%
67%
62%
0%
10%
52%
76%
52%
67%
5%
67%
62%
Reaction, satisfaction and engagement data
How would you rate the following:
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
3
Strongly
Agree
Not
recorded
5
0
4
5
Workshop was enjoyable
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
16
100%
6
Relevant to my professional practice
0
0%
0
0%
2
10%
11
52%
7
33%
1
5%
7
Increased my understanding
0
0%
2
10%
3
14%
10
48%
5
24%
1
5%
8
Understood the training learning outcomes
0
0%
3
14%
0
0%
12
57%
5
24%
1
5%
9
Met my learning needs
0
0%
3
14%
2
10%
11
52%
5
24%
0
0%
10
Confident I can apply my learning to my
job
0
0%
1
5%
4
20%
10
50%
4
20%
1
5%
11
Committed to apply learning to my job
0
0%
1
5%
2
10%
8
40%
9
45%
0
0%
12
Sufficient opportunity for interaction &
discussion
0
0%
1
5%
2
10%
10
48%
8
38%
0
0%
13
Comfortable with pace of training delivery
1
5%
3
14%
4
19%
9
43%
4
19%
0
0%
Poor
How would you rate the following:
Excellent
1
2
3
4
5
Not
recorded
0
14
The presenting skills of:
Lead Training
0
0%
1
6%
5
29%
9
53%
2
12%
0
0%
15
The knowledge of:
Lead Trainer
0
0%
1
6%
3
18%
7
41%
6
35%
0
0%
16
Quality of practical exercises/activities
1
6%
0
0%
4
25%
11
69%
0
0%
0
0%
17
The training resources
0
0%
0
0%
8
38%
7
33%
1
5%
5
24%
18
Would you recommend this workshop to
a colleague
No
2
10%
Yes
19
90%
Not recorded
Poor
Excellent
1
22
Overall this workshop was
0
2
0%
0
3
0%
6
4
32%
7
5
37%
6
31%
0
0%
Not
recorded
0
0
0%
10
Appendix 2 – Event timetable
Developing Leadership for Safety and
Quality in Healthcare
Medical Education Centre, Kirklands Hospital
4th, 5th, 6th February 2013
TIMING
Agenda
SESSION TITLE
METHOD
Day 1
DESCRIPTION
0900 - 0915
Introductions and pre-workshop evaluation
0915 - 0945
Welcome activity
0945 - 1100
Theory of profound knowledge
Presentation
Discussion
Dr Sanjiv Chohan, Consultant Anaesthesia and Intensive
Care and Fellow of the Scottish Patient Safety
Programme, discusses the idea that real improvement
only comes from an awareness of four components first
articulated by Dr W Edwards Deming.
Tea / Coffee/ Networking (1100 – 1130)
1130 - 1245
Preparing for Improvement (1)
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
Mark Johnston and Emma Levy, Training and Research
Officers (Patient Safety & Quality Improvement) at NHS
Education for Scotland, provide a refresher of the thinking
behind improvement for patient safety. Helping you to
increase your understanding, create driver diagrams,
prioritise your improvement effort and understand how
to identify and select appropriate measures.
Lunch & Networking (1245 – 1345)
1345 – 1445
Preparing for Improvement (2)
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
Continued >
Tea / Coffee/ Networking (1445 – 1500)
1500 - 1615
Understanding data (1)
1615 - 1630
Next steps
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
Interpreting run charts and understanding
variation within a system. Understand the
importance of starting small with your
improvement efforts. Emma Levy and Mark
Johnston
CLOSE (1630)
11
Developing Leadership for Safety and
Quality in Healthcare
Medical Education Centre, Kirklands Hospital
4th, 5th, 6th February 2013
TIMING
Agenda
SESSION TITLE
METHOD
0900 - 0915
0915 - 1015
1015 - 1100
Day 2
DESCRIPTION
Housekeeping and feedback from yesterday
Understanding data (2)
The Human Factors of Patient
Safety: Overview
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
Continued >
Presentation /
Discussion
Around 80% of patient safety incidents have links with human
factors; many of these involve communication and other nontechnical clinical skills such as situational awareness, teamwork,
and clinical decision making. Dr Gordon Cowan of NHS
Lanarkshire provides an insight into this fascinating and broad
subject.
Tea / Coffee/ Networking (1100 – 1115)
1115 - 1200
The Human Factors of Patient
Safety: Overview (continued)
Presentation /
Discussion
Dr Gordon Cowan
1200 - 1245
Decision Making
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
A brief overview of a model for decision making, followed by a
discussion of its application to improvement work. Emma Levy
and Mark Johnston
Lunch & Networking (1245 – 1345)
1345 - 1415
1415 – 1500
Knowledge into Action
Presentation /
Discussion /
Amanda Minns, Knowledge and Library Service Manager,
outlines the support the Knowledge and Library Services can
provide. Demonstration of the Quality Improvement Hub
website and the resources available
Team Work
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
Communication is often cited as the key component of ‘high
performing’ teams. Mark Johnston reaffirms how we define
teams and highlights an example of exceptional communication
within a team.
Tea / Coffee/ Networking (1500 – 1515)
1515 - 1600
Understanding the Challenges of
Engaging Clinical Teams
1600 - 1610
Next Steps
Presentation /
Discussion /
Activity
An overview of Influencing factors effecting changes within the
Clinical Team. Maria Lamb and Diane Ritchie, Clinical Quality
Improvement Facilitators for NHS Lanarkshire share their
experience of implementing improvement within teams
CLOSE (1610)
12
Developing Leadership for Safety and
Quality in Healthcare
Medical Education Centre, Kirklands Hospital
4th, 5th, 6th February 2013
TIMING
Agenda
SESSION TITLE
METHOD
0900 - 0915
0930 - 1030
1030 - 1115
Day 3
DESCRIPTION
Housekeeping and feedback from yesterday
Leadership and culture for Person
Centred Care
Discussion /
Activity
The ‘Person Centred’ care programme recently launched.
Rosemary Lyness, Executive Director of NMHAP for NHS
Lanarkshire outlines the meaning of ‘being’ personcentred and explores core themes of Care Experience;
Leadership/staff experience and Co-production
System level thinking
Discussion /
Activity
Systems thinking is the process of understanding how
things, regarded as systems, influence one another within
a whole. Dr Sanjiv Chohan discusses the implications for
safety and quality within Healthcare settings
Tea / Coffee/ Networking (1100 – 1115)
1130 - 1245
Discussion /
Activity
LEAN
LEAN emphasises streamlining processes to provide what
the internal or external customer wants with minimal
wasted time, effort or cost. Karen Spiers of NHS
Lanarkshire discusses the benefits of taking a ‘LEAN’
approach to healthcare.
Lunch & Networking (1245 – 1330)
1330 - 1445
Planning a test of change (1)
Discussion /
Activity
Bringing together all the themes of the three days to plan
your first test of change for an improvement project in
your workplace. Emma Levy and Mark Johnston
Tea / Coffee/ Networking (1445 – 1500)
1500 - 1600
Planning a test of change (2)
Discussion /
Activity
Continued >
1600 - 1610
Evaluation of the event
Discussion /
Activity
Summary of main learning points and a chance for final
questions. Post-workshop evaluation to be completed
with a view to improvement of the workshop.
CLOSE (1610)
13