Darzy Health Report
John Mortimer
We help you reshape your organisation where people thrive and organisations succeed through empowerment, team working and being closer to your customers
Like many people, I was holding my breath again waiting for another report of the ills of the NHS.
The Darzy report does not hide from uncovering the issues Darzy believes the NHS faces. The report has gone into depths that have previously been hidden, and that is welcome.
However, the report does suffer from a flaw and that is that the review has been conducted from the perspective of the NHS, and the current principles that its design rests on. Those are the mechanistic paradigm of a central health organisation that processes people through it. Having said that, the report does identify some of its underlying principles, like:
There is little in the report that would address these.
In the end it gives some good behaviours that would provide a better NHS. But it does not recognise the reasons why they are not there today. The barriers to good working that are in place today need to be highlighted and banished.
Ultimately, where is Darzy pointing towards. Him primary tenants of change are technical and improvements. And this is not wrong when we are facing a crisis. However, we also need real reform. And real reform can only occur when we can understand the whole of health and the NHS as a system. Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary does highlight three shifts that are needed:
He recognises short term and long term reform. But the common patient record is a potential threat to real change. It was tried once and resulted in the largest ever failed cost in the public sector. The problem lies in attempting to tie everything together when they are not designed to do so. When in fact the patient record problems is one far bigger than simply a new implementation. It will also hardwire in centrally designed flows of work that are highly inefficient, thus making change even more difficult.
Systems thinking allows us to shift our perspective from the traditional machine based paradigm, to other perspectives where we can see things that we could not see before. Systems thinking highlights the causes of cost, rather than simply focusing on cost, so where are these causes recognised? There is only partial understanding, and little knowledge of how the whole works together to create a dysfunctional system. It is still very much the parable of the six wise men and the elephant, each person recognising their part of the whole system and none recognising the elephant.
Darzy's traditional paradigm is clear from the report, and also some of the wording that highlights that paradigm:
领英推荐
‘A core tenet of industrialisation that transformed our prosperity in the 19th and 20th centuries was increased use of capital relative to labour to drive up productivity. In recent years, it appears that the NHS has been subjected to a kind of capitalism-in- reverse: forced to increase labour relative to capital, rather than the other way round.’
His mindset is still lingering in Command & Control - or New Public Management, which was still the predominant paradigm when he was in government.
Looking at the concept of the systems thinking iceberg, the deepest roots of how an organisation is understood is down to the mindset of those that make the decisions. Traditionally, our organisations work through Taylorism, or as some call it, Command & Control. This is not one thing, but a myriad of beliefs about how organisations work. If we look at the changes Thatcher put in, they were underpinned by one set of principles, which we now call New Public Management, NPM. Everything that has occurred to the NHS since then, has been in line with those principles. The Darzy report begins to reject some of those principles, but it offers no alternative. Infact it potentiality retains some of those principles. So, no matter what improvements are made, the principles will ultimately dictate the fundamental design and behaviour. This analysis is the result of many interventions where alternatives to NPM have occurred, and the results studied.
What's next?
For those of us looking with systems thinking lenses, and that have tried out systemic approaches in the NHS, we know what needs to shift for true reform. And much of what we know is not in the report. All of what has been written by others is most valid, especially the points about mission driven. There is one point we have learned time and time again, and that is that the front line people in the NHS, the manager, leaders, they are all behaving as the 'system' drives them to behave. So, any attempt to shift this is met by pressure to comply. We have found only one solution to this, and that is that firstly the systemic barriers and causes have to be removed and replaced by new ones. Once that occurs, then the new can replace the old.
The NHS is not one system
The 'health system' is not in fact one thing, but a collection if many and complex systems. We need to start by recognising that when we put it all together and thought off it as one system, we have already design it in a way that causes it to fail.
These are highly complex and interrelated systems. As with any complex system we need to try things out to discover what works, and what does not work. What we need next is to create new systems with those that work in them, and with patients.
An example
This example is of a reform prototype that was performed by avoiding any of the rules, structures and procedures of the current NHS. And this is what they achieved:?
Head of Programmes: Digital
1 个月A very perceptive and articulate piece John. In short, we are grabbing the tail instead of the head. I do wish some days I could think as clearly as you do!
John Mortimer, I started looking a little bit towards healthcare when working at WSP with the intention to understand if system thinking was undertaken. Glad to see that you are exploring those pathways. I am seldom fond of trying to move learning from one industry to the next because if not undertaken correctly, it tends to cause more problems than it solves. I can't help wondering however, if some lessons from the railway Industry System Integration (ISI) approach would not help clarify dependencies, emerging system behaviours, trade-offs and system problems with split cost-benefit effects. I am sure Nassar Majothi and my old colleague Mark Burton for example have some valuable lessons in regards to ISI and how it might be relevant to healthcare.
Online Community Manager, Systems Convener
2 个月Hi John, I think you urgently need to work with Mark Smith, Donna Hall, Better Way, Locality, Demos, Vanguard, New Local and others to create a shared public response saying exactly this! To state that research on reformed services to test your proposed approach has already found £22 billion (in 2024 money) would be saved by focusing on patient/user need, and not allowing failure demand to dominate. Mark's team's current work suggests that figure was an underestimate. Demos' recent report Liberated Public Services has validated this approach. Nationally, so few yet seem to realise that radical reforms are being tried already, and would save billions. (And allow further reinvestment, to transform the NHS). I know there are one or two personality clashes within this milieu, but we all owe it to the NHS to try to come together to make the liberating reform option very visible.
Driving transformative action through systems thinking | Director of Systems Integration, HS2
2 个月John Mortimer spot on, the report does highlight the problems (great that they are surfaced) not so much root causes or systemic issues. Patients, as the main beneficiary and ultimately the funders should be at the centre of a systems approach to transforming the health system.