Edge Talks; December: Transcript: Empowering people to be heard and helping leaders to listen as part of creating the #AHPsMandate

NHS IQ Webinar (UKNHSI0212A)
Page 1 of 17 Downloaded on: 02 Dec 2016 3:12 PM
[Holly.Captioner is Live]
JANET:
We're going to start the WebEx today.
It is a fantastic session, thank you to everyone who has joined so far. We were looking forward
to learning more about this. I am just going to move on slightly. Joining in today and beyond.
If you are turning the session please keep that chat box to monitor. We'll be monitoring that all
the way through the session. Please use the hashtag #EdgeTalks and for Twitter @the
EdgeNHS, and there are Facebook groups and chats.
We want this to be as participating as possible. Use the chat, use Twitter, tell us anything you
have to say.
My name is Janet. I am an associate working with NHS England. I will be your host today. I will
be looking after you but also in the chat room, our technical is Paul Woodley, he often joins us
on the Edge Talk and we also have a special guest who is Naomi McVey.
She wants to be that a and HP community with Joe. So great to have you working as part of the
team today.
Our presenters, we have a fantastic pair of presenters today. Dr Joanne Fillingham and Dr Peter
Thomond.
Joanne is our regular blogger and comes from Staffordshire and is in (Inaudible) partnership.
She is an allied health professional and she also won the BHP community. So fantastic
applause to you, Joanne. We're so excited to have you as part of this today.
We also have Dr Peter Thomond and he is the founding partner for (Inaudible) (Inaudible) staff
engagement environmental technology. There is a background, for Peter.
We're really looking forward to hear what the presenters have to say today around this really
important issue. I will hand over to Peter now.
You we go, Peter.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Joe is Batman now and I Robin today. You can be a Wonder Woman.
DR JOANNE FILLINGHAM:
Thank you everybody for that introduction. It is a pleasure to be here today and it is a privilege
to be asked to come in and present to you today on the Edge talks.
I'll talk about my role as the chief allied health professional officer and with Pete, company
clever together and his wonderful team. That is the journey we're going to talk about today.

DR PETER THOMOND:
Thank you for the introduction. Thanks for the opportunity of Joe. What we want to share with
you is a journey that we have been on together and I want to share the overarching take away if
you like, at the beginning, and then I want to share how we went about doing that.
In and eight months we engage the best part of 2000 people and they shared over 16,000
ideas, comments and votes from across the whole country, people engaged all around the
world.
We completed a series of countrywide physics and the series of analyses of policies and
combining and triangulating all that data as well as insight from 53 case studies, we have
effectively, Joe and the team, have enabled the best part of 2000 people to go create new
frameworks for the healthcare system with a focus on a HP's.
Some was on saying to me as a meeting, and their view we have done this four times quicker
than normal and a 10th of the cost. By having real people's voices directly at the centre of this
new framework within healthcare. We are really proud of that.
We want to share with you today the journey that Jo and the team have been on. How we will
do this in the time we have been allotted is follow the four steps. The four steps that sit at the
heart of one of our key methods. At Clever Together.
This is a result of cloud surfing within the site from people all over geographies. What we will do
is talk about how we create, to build consensus from hundreds and hundreds of people, what
we do is we define a mandate that we need to engage. What is the narrative, what is the story?
And we will spend the first quarter explaining that.
Next, when we have a mandate to engage and wear great leaders generally want to listen to
people out there and across the sector, what we do is design a communication strategy. People
are totally unaware of the opportunity, to taking them from their from being aware and then
getting them involved.
People that enjoy the online workshops and the other engagements we have, had returned the
input into genuine insights? And there are some deep analytics that we use their to do that.
And then how do you then take that insight into action. So this is the structure of the
methodology. We thought it would be useful to share our journey with you. I will hand over to
Joanne to tell you about the reasons we have for running this project came about.
Pete just talked about the four sections so we will concentrate on the mandate. So what was our
authority to act in this instance?
Hopefully most of you will know, who is training, about if you're in health or the social wider care
system, is about the (Inaudible) which was published in October 2014 and was a shared vision
across many of the arm's-length bodies in health and social care systems.

It presented to us a number of challenges across the system but also some potential solutions
within that document and I think it was historically in the way that it wasn't a huge document,
what I call a door stopper which is normally what has come out of an NHS, it is an easy,
readable, and it offers a blueprint for change for the future. In terms of three gaps, the health
and well-being gap, the care and quality And the finance and efficiency.
And some solutions to that. So in terms of the need to radically upgrade in terms of preventions,
prevent us continuing to spend thousands of pounds on wholly avoidable diseases, they need to
get serious on quality and reducing variations in quality across the system and they need to
deliver new models of care.
And also keeping our eye on the money, the taxpayers' money. So that is where the national
policy obviously came from.
We know off the back of the five year view there was the Vanguard program in NHS England
particularly to address the new models of care. There were five types of models. If you go to the
NHS England website this map is on there and you will be able to see in your local area where
these new models are.
There is the notable community model, acute care collaborations and hands care in care homes
and emergency care and (Inaudible). So go and have a look.
(unknown term) who is the clinical officer, as part of her role she visited many different
organisations in 2015 and 2016. Obviously this is following the publication of the five-year
forward view and the commencement of the new models of care.
Without doubt, from where she visited both from clinicians on the ground up to senior leaders,
she was asked what was the vision for allied health professionals in the system? How can we
utilise their resource to better effect, to be able to deliver the change that we need and the
health and care systems for the future.
Undoubtedly, everywhere she visited, that is what she asked. I think one of the things we were
challenged about was whether we could have a combined strategy, so the nurse strategy was
developed around this same time the leading change happened but there was some discussion
over whether we should have a joint strategy but it was really felt that allied health professionals
had never had a strategy before and it was crucially needed to hear the voice and assist them in
what it is that they do really fantastic now and what it is that they can harness in terms of that to
develop new ways of working in the future.
I have discussed about the three challenges that are faced and some of the solutions to those.
Those are outlined in the five year forward view.
In particular, what we wanted to AHP and a Suzanne and her visits and Schiller Morris, we were
challenging AHP to say in terms of the chemical, what do GHb is do for the people, what do we
do for populations and how do we evidence that we deliver quality but also reduce efficiency?
These were challenges that we post to the system one will presenting that at the time in 2015
and 2016.

DR PETER THOMOND:
You have set this context. Suzanne, there will be people on this list we had who don't know
Suzanne and there will be people who do. She is in a position where she is the chief allied
health professional officer. It is the pretty massive role.
I got the privilege of working with some senior evil across the system, and you do too, I think
she is unique as a leader. She felt that to write in the challenge that we just talked about, she
had to genuinely listen to as many voices as possible.
Her core values as a leader, we really felt she had to listen not only to AHP on the ground
because I truly believe that they have the answer to these questions that we were posing,
because we were hearing those answers when we were out in the field and presenting.
But not in a listen to them but listen to the wider system. And that includes patients, service
users, community. If we were to truly develop a strategy that was fit for purpose, we had to do
that.
DR PETER THOMOND:
This picture on this page, in fact, that picture was in this room that Jo and I are in right now. We
had most of the chief officers and most of the professional bodies came together and we run a
workshop with Suzanne.
That little picture is Jerry, Richard Evans, the whole lot, they all came here and Suzanne talked
through this journey that she has been on, literally around the country, and they talked on their
journeys around this tree. There was a shared agreement, really, that they either it could be
gains made for all AHPs and the healthcare system if we orientate around some common goals
and common judges together.
We have done some background research on each of these professional bodies and we could
see that there are some common goals emerging as well. In this room, we didn't feel that there
was a need for a shared strategy because there were such diversity in that group.
But they did feel that if there was a national conversation about what but our collective impact
be, with could find something really special. And in that room with those leaders, they genuinely
believe that we sat on the evidence that if we pull in the same direction, AHP has a collective
impact that is generally transformational for the healthcare system.
So what would that impact be? What we have to do differently to have that impact? And there
are examples out there that are already happening. There is heaps of examples where it was
happening all over. There is already great stuff happening but how do we spot that?
So this is the task. This is the mandate if you like that popped out of this process. I think really,
the room agreed that there was a need to assert and demonstrate but it was also to provide
leaders of the system with a real, to inform them and inspire them with a framework, if you like,
a clear view of what the transformative potential for AHP is but also examples that are out there
I could scale and exploit but in an evidence-based way, not just stick a nice case study online.

[Olivia.Captioner is Live]
So that was the mandate. That was the challenge that was going down. Suzanne bravely
revealed that actually we bet AHPs nationally know the system beyond these questions. So that
was the task we set out.
We knew that the AHPs had those answers, we have those convocations in the field where we
post questions about what we do for the field and populations, about sustaining client views.
AHP have the answers to all the questions. If we could collectively pull it all together it would be
very powerful.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Exactly. And a lot of leaders we came across typically feel that they are bringing the team
balance and used their brain and tell people this is how we are going to solve the problem.
Suzanne herself said actually, let's quit this round. If we actually are going to achieve these
things and demonstrate potential, we will do workshops.
There were things that came up around crowdsourcing. Really working in a really smart way.
You do not want mob rule. You want the crowdsourced. Plus engagement. We have the
mandate that we agreed on how to interact.
Really why crowd sourcing? Because you want to be able to get to a load of people all the time,
you can have an online workshop and have an online process and reduced the costs.
In means you can have a conversation, analyse the data, analyse the solutions much faster.
I got so excited when we used these platforms, got so excited about the work they did in
(Unknown term) and face-to-face there. The work they can do in the digital platform, clinicians
that don't have time to get the workshops because of their day job. To me, it's an absolutely
beautiful solution to ensuring people have a voice there.
DR PETER THOMOND:
The lights have gone off because we've been so motionless in the room.
(Laughter)
I have got no idea, Jo.
The next bit here we want to share is so hopefully you get a sense that we did not just said that
send this to a group of people. What we did was build a consensus of people that wanted to
hear the voice of people. We want to work out the really clear narrative of why there is this need
to engage, what the (inaudible) would be and what the outcomes would look like.
Well, not the outcomes, but the end result.

That piece of work for the mandate the part that is most important when it comes to crowd
sourcing. Leaders want to know. The mandate is actually important and the piece of work that
often gets overlooked. It is hard work and can be political.
The next part and we get the mandate is how do we get the public interest that? Before we talk
about that, we have a little thing we want to, which is we know exactly which part of (inaudible).
But we want to know a bit more about the audience. We want you to share your views.
Hopefully it works. Neither Jo or I know. Hopefully it will work.
There is a little button here to start, is that right?
PAUL:
Hi, Peter. If you have that thing open, there is a bit to open the poll.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Open poll. Thank you, Paul.
If you could look at that now, I am not sure if there are some questions on your screen.
People have started that now. Nurses first. And the AHP is in it. We expected a lot of people
from there, that is great.
Whilst you're feeling now, we can see the number of people who have done that. Thank you.
59% of you have done it. What we will do is talk about how you generated interest. Jo.
How we generated interest, we wanted to know what we wanted to achieve, we wanted to
genuinely listen to your views. We did that in a communications campaign and we used social
media. Historical ways of communicating via email, and also on a voluntary basis, Sheila,
myself and Leanne.
Also part of the communications campaign, you will see it in terms of the regional leads and
networks.
Again, the network bodies were crucial in getting the message out to the networks.
Organisations like (Unknown term) have helped get the message out. Various communications
to show people were inspired and informed of the end in mind and how to get there.
DR PETER THOMOND:
The critical narrative of why we're engaging and what it will look like is this. It will give you the
ability to look at things in a powerful way and again I think coming back to engaging with
regional AHPs and also the patient and Public too.
You have a really clear communication chain because of that.
Yes. But was a challenge. We were challenged by the fact I guess, there were two major

players. The challenge was around when you're going to listen to what people said, how to act
on that. Maybe people say this is the case but it wasn't going to be a tick box exercise and the
opportunity, you do want to miss it.
And the challenge now with maybe coproduction with patients in the community. The challenge
is to have those people involved in this type of program and in this type of platform. You would
have to do a lot of work to make sure patients get involved.
We pushed back and said I'm not sure if we need to and these people have a different
experience, a crucial experience of bringing them to this process.
PAUL MONTGOMERY:
Absolutely. And one of the things about that is that Suzanne and Sheila and teams that formed
around, we wanted an impact, which was why we used this thing. If we don't want an impact...
but this was why we used it because we want to hear your voice.
This is how it generated interest, whether people came from.
Yes, when the people we cared about actually came to this platform, the networks were really
crucial. A large percentage of people had heard about the platform through the network. The
message went down through the AHP network and down to the organisations.
You can see how crucial the network and the leads were. I think what is really interesting to me,
when we come back to it in terms of the platform and email address, we started with about 300
emails I think. When the platform opened and emailed out, and opened that, people can be
invited to join, order colleagues can invite them.
I think we actually started with only a few people and ended up with far more.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Yes, the experience of the existing networks and influence of (inaudible) as well. I think people
think typically if you're going to do something like this social media is the way.
Actually, there are networks and we build a crowd of leveraging people. And I think another
group of people have such a committed network the way HP is. It's pretty interesting and that is
a hypothesis we looked at.
In terms of where they came from, this is interesting. It is a national conversation. Our platform
definitely, although all the contributions were anonymous, it takes a little bit of a snapshot of
what people are putting in, as do most websites.
You can see at first, people logging in from all over the UK. When you zoom out and you can
see we are giving voice to AHPs all over the world.
I can't believe it fills the whole map. And people say how committed people in AHPs are.

DR PETER THOMOND:
Yes. (inaudible)
We emailed senior leaders that might be interested.
DR PETER THOMOND:
This was the way we generated interest. You can see people from the UK and overseas. Again,
it comes back to the people.
We could have run a series of workshops, but that would have cost a lot more and only a limited
amount of people can fit in the room.
Because we could have conversations in a block, it opened it up to much more people and
meant we could have a dialogue.
We will talk about, what was it called, the online platform.
7% of nurses 7% are nurses, project managers, hello to patient services, wonderful to have you
here. And then 33% themselves as other.
In terms of regions, we have not, national representative and non-UK. Welcome to those
outside the UK. In terms of age range, we have quite a spread.
We have 73%, nearly 80% of people who are female versus male. That is something interesting
about the AHP space as well. I don't think I have ever been to so many meetings whether I the
only man in the room.
How to generate insight? This is the concept of taking input from hundreds of people and
turning that input into genuine insight. Before I do that, is it worth asking for questions?
So Paul, Kate or Janet, is anything you want to highlight the people are talking about at the
moment?
PAUL:
People particularly like the conversational approach at the start of the session. They made it feel
very welcoming.
DR PETER THOMOND:
That is then part of the ethos, right?
PAUL:
And people like referring, rather than just the call, the way that you had engagement, it made it
feel like a border program. A few people have asked to see your poll results.
DR PETER THOMOND:

Always transparent with data.
PAUL WOODLEY:
If you have that option on the bottom, option two, shared results, share with attendees. And you
can do that so everyone can see it. A little box to tick. Tick on that. That's it. Everyone can see
that now.
Can we go to Naomi before we go ahead? Is Naomi there?
NAOMI:
Morning. No questions from Twitter so far. Sally has been tweeting this morning. One of the
things I was going to comment on was paid, you talked about AHPs networks and about that
being strong. I think you are right, I think we're really lucky to have some well established AHPs
networks around the country.
Here in the north-west we're really lucky, we have some from the pharmacy, psychological
professions, but I think there is some real strength in value around those wider professions.
DR PETER THOMOND:
You are very humble and saying you are very lucky to have these networks. I think the AHPs
lucky to have people like yourself, Amy and Joe, who drive and support and nurture these
networks to help them flourish. You say you are lucky but it takes a lot of effort and I think there
is a lot of effort you do at the team that others around the country could replicate.
I don't mean to make you blush but it is true, right?
NAOMI MCVEY:
We are very fortunate in England. I am going up on a tangent.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Should we crack onto the next part then? Because it will probably raise some questions about
(Inaudible). So we're going to talk about how we generated insight and what we will do is talk a
little bit about the platform itself, give you some stats and facts about what happened and when
and then how we have actually analysed the data.
Great.
Here on the screen you can see a platform of what it look like when you open a phase 1. We
had two faces and the first phase was absolutely about generating that insight and it was a
tailor-made online destination for delivering our end goal in mind. We had two key questions
really that we wanted AHP to answer. You can see that in defining a potential in realising our
potential.
How do you think England would be different if AHP was used effectively? Please say how and
why. So those were the two key questions that we wanted for people to come and have their
voice and have their say.

More crucially, we wanted people to share their successes and innovative ways of delivering
services or case examples and that was crucially that third part of gathering that innovation a
HP innovation. What you can see, there is little lightbulb there underneath the question. You can
see how many ideas people have posted. You can see the comments of the speech bubbles
than how many comments have been made on those ideas.
People can vote whether they like it, they love voting. We are so used to Facebook. People are
really interested in - is that AHP is so nice I think that first three or four days we notice that
nobody dislikes anything at all.
It's almost, seeing as we don't like it, come on, people. But as soon as a few dislikes went in...
DR PETER THOMOND:
It's about creating a safe environment and once people did, we felt permission. So there are
three things that I want to point out about that platform, what we just talked about.
One is, I am sure those of you who have logged onto WebEx, I am sure most of you will be
reasonably technologically sound, I would have thought, because WebEx is not always the
smoothest of platforms but it is a great platform for what it does.
Our technology for the NHS, if you look at the screenshot, it does not look beautiful,
sophisticated or anything but it is designed that on purpose. We co-created a look and feel,
exactly where the buttons are there's 50 ambulance drivers and there's another 50 or 75 health
visitors and which arose, those two sectors of the NHS because our research showed that they
were some of the least digitally literate people in the system.
So we could set that with them and say, "Where would you put this or how would we do this to
design it?"
We also tested this platform along with other types of technologies because we used to be a lot
more technologically agnostic but we found they were deeply complex so it is like technology
find for (Inaudible). Beautiful singing and dancing, graphics and everything else. We saw that
but more complex or supposedly technologically beautiful looking, it created a barrier to those
that were less digitally literate. So this is why it was designed in this way.
Our platform is designed out of NHS like banking or law look quite different because you have a
different field. We sometimes get asked, can we not make this more pretty? But we don't.
Because we know and we have tested this for so many audiences that it is really important and
we're leaving this because we are generating how we did this, technology in this instance is the
easiest part of the process, writing a mandate, getting interested, technology is easy bit but
don't get mistaken in getting some piece of technology and thinking it is the solution, it is a
tournament or the simplest or possible thing.
The other thing to highlight in this is that Joe and other people in the network didn't just let
people share ideas and get on with it, you are actively facilitating. So if you put an idea on

there... It's not a survey. Let's see what's physical differences there are between these groups.
It is a conversation although we do have data in the background that we can run through, but I
just wanted to highlight that to let you know it was a facilitating process which is why we call it
an online workshop. If you think about it as a workshop you wind up having a lot more
conversation and facilitation.
People found it was a really great CDP. A little bit of data for you and we will was you through
these because we are conscious of time but I think these are really interesting. This shows over
the time period of that first phase how many logins we had. You can see was over three weeks,
can see when people really login it was Monday to Friday, can see in the last week there,
everybody really wanted to have their say, we have some people login.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Invited people in and when you said facilitation, people came back to the platform to get
involved.
Remember in the platform you can post ideas or comments, one of the questions was how
many comments was made and the rest is how many (Inaudible) is made over that time period.
You could see of the work and the activity drops so people were coming in and making
comments.
So how many people voted again over that time period.
DR PETER THOMOND:
It falls in line with (Inaudible).
So we had that first phase, after that we did an initial analysis of that data. Sorry, I am jumping
ahead here. Sorry, who took part in the first phase, here is a graphic to show all the participants,
what it shows is the red line shows that percentage engaged in the online workshop and if there
was a representative going onto the platform.
What we saw was some of the smaller professions were really keen to have their voices heard.
You can see the speech and language therapist, dietician, or just an art music and drama
therapist were higher in terms of their AHP registrants.
We saw some of the smaller voices, there were smaller voices heard that there were fewer of
them coming to the platform than what were participants.
That is one of the reasons we were reopened for a third week. Initial live or just opening for a
few weeks but in the third week we did more commuting to gauge what it meant with those
specific professions.
And then went over that in the third week. We saw a data saturation point in that third week,
there were no new ideas coming in so we felt comfortable.

DR PETER THOMOND:
There were no new things coming in from that population, they were repeating things that were
said by others. Two things you say they were really important, one, understanding who is active
taking part, because you said you wanted to target everyone, or professions, so we can
categorically say all professions are taking part, we know they have and we have a broad
example, the target population professionals, it maps the population of the country.
So in that sense, although it is a qualitative piece of work, there is a statistical semblance there
between the two populations.
The other part of data saturation, even in the smaller groups that engaged less, what we can
see is that when they were engaging they were saying the same, the stuff that had been said.
So we reach that saturation.
So there were two analytical methods of understanding the data and the process to know we're
genuinely are listening.
If you read some of the contributions on the platform, their voice really came through strong.
[Olivia.Captioner is Live]
We thought about thematic analysis. These themes, they will race to me, so I carried out the
analysis. Peaks team says that you take on the voice of the crowd, and I really saw that
happening.
What we saw was five of the regional needs also supported in looking at the themes. There was
94% agreement and we analysed and decoded that. It was a process that in ensuring we not
only had the right things, but also sharing them.
PAUL MONTGOMERY:
And I think also raising that things people have not seen before, raising that... it is not true. What
it does is it categorises all of the things into one deep vein that you can sort of dives into and
create a narrative.
Then you can create ideas and say, actually, although this thing you may have less ideas and
there are some weaker signals inside there, if you are a research geek like me and my team,
well, we profile, you become one of our team
It is fascinating. If we just different to the themes at the top, it would be much less. But...
The lights are going again.
We ended up with four themes and areas that we have to look at and do that in the future, four
areas of commitment to achieve the change, for things which AHPs need to focus on and 16
specific enablers to focus on.

I thought one of the key areas for the conference, we presented that back, the amazing
engagement for BHP, thousands of people, really amazing.
This was the man could be presented at the conference at that time. You can see the four areas
of commitment at the top, along with the four areas to focus on or priorities.
The big circle is the four areas of impact.
DR PETER THOMOND:
The bit here for me that was really interesting, Jo did the research and (inaudible) did the
analysis. It gave some great feedback.
It just gave me goosebumps. I always present this finding the same way. We always get asked
what the definition of an AHPs. There should be one because they are so diverse. We need an
definition of what AHPs do, not in totality, but to capture some of that.
I think this is a great quote of the perform. All contributions are anonymous of the country we
came from.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Jo, Sheila and people were not going to stop there. What we wanted to do was take that back
out of there. They said we have the coanalytics of your platform. We want to know what you
like, what you want, how to improve it.
So we launched stage two. You can see it on your slide. Can see the AHPs impact, commitment
and focus. These are the four emerging themes for each and we switched off at this point to get
new ideas and switched on to get crowd votes and to share comments on that.
We saw what the crowd like, the terms used.
Yes. Again, we just want to show a bit of potato. That is really interesting for us. So it was a two
week period and people could login when we opened it. Unlike the first phase, this really took off
so we again felt like we were at the date a saturation point.
This slide shows the comments, which Peter says were the emerging themes, this shows how
many people were submitting to the platform. Again, the people's votes. Again, those tapered
off in the second week.
PAUL MONTGOMERY:
The interesting thing for me is that the process we used the is what we call a validation process.
The teams developed from scratch and took that to work, ask what is strong and how to improve
it. You and Suzanne used that methodology to take that conversation out to people.
I thought when people had a comment it was like a workshop where people make a comment
on a post-it note. If you don't analyse all the post-it notes, this is when the platform...

Yes, and the red is the registrants, the green is who took part in phase 1 and the blue is who
took part in phase 1 and two. The team... it goes right in scale.
DR PETER THOMOND:
You think it needs some analysis? Maybe we can explore it another time.
The (inaudible). I became a bit disheartened about the number of users who came to the
platform. Actually, you look at the numbers, this was not a platform where it needed to see
where they came from.
There were a high percentage of (inaudible) and I suspect that maybe a large number of
patients.
The next slide will show a quote from a patient. We saw what the patient issues were.
At the end of both phases, we had 1949 people engage. Actually, with the online platform it was
nearly 4000 people, so people engaged, almost (inaudible).
DR PETER THOMOND:
Half of the people that engaged online, half of the people that engaged elsewhere, you put that
together... This is how people engaged.
We wanted to thank everyone. We were really excited about the methodology so we just wanted
to thank you.
The next part of the mandate is all about what we're going to do next, what we are going to do
with this. The next step, you might have seen this, if all this is will end up in a product.
This is the end point in mind in which we have this mandate, we have the authority to act, to
listen to AHP and develop a vision to inform and inspire the system in how it can go into the
future.
Our program will generate some other things in the New Year.
I'm conscious of time so quickly show you what the slide looks like. The part one is about the
impacts for people at different stages in the population. Each of the impacts shows innovative
PHP solutions delivering on those impacts.
Impact two is where we utilise commitment and the priorities from the emerging themes from the
conversations. And as I said, what we have developed is a framework. I mentioned those 16
enablers, so there are 16 questions posed in the system of which can be used as a self
assessment to look at how the we utilise AHPs best.
For leaders in England, this is about AHPs themselves. Again, posing questions to leaders -
commitments and priorities. Really generating the plan.

This is for everyone to consider. Boards, STP leaders, higher education institutions, using this
framework and plan to look at how to best utilise AHPs how they can best utilise this practice
and you start the action.
DR PETER THOMOND:
OK. In some ways, we wanted to sit with you today and share about what you thought and
action that is coming out. I think at least in January there is things, time cycles other such stuff.
So we wanted to tell you that little bit more about this next step of action.
There is a really important part of the framework that has been cocreated by hundreds and
hundreds of professionals And service users where that framework is the voice of those people,
triaangulated with policy and system leaders to 2 then help system leaders to figure out what to
do.
This is really the best practice framework that will help readers figure out the next step, and to
hold those leaders to come.
We can't find anywhere where this has really been done, so it's a great example of where great
leaders have really worked hard to listen to great people across the system in the whole
community of professional groups.
We can't wait to see how the next stage unfolds.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Yes, we have some plans and ideas.
And an hour is up.
DR PETER THOMOND:
And the hour is up. You have to go.
So over to Paul and Kate and others from the Horizon group.
SPEAKER:
Thank you, there was so much different ideas coming through. I just wanted to go over to
Twitter, Andrew, the chat room. So over to support and over to Naomi very quickly. Anything
from your side, Naomi?
NAOMI:
Not so much from Twitter although Paul Chapman has commented on how giving people an
anonymous powerful voice really help to encourage engagement and think about the ways
patient voices came through strongly.
I see some questions popping up on the chat room.

PAUL:
I'll let you finish with Twitter first and go through that in a minute.
DR PETER THOMOND:
Before you talk about (Inaudible), that was tested as a process. People are given an
anonymous voice in this environment but knowing that if we say some things that are
inappropriate we can find out who they are. So the voice is anonymized but they are not
completely anonymous if they were to (Inaudible). We never find out who said whatever but that
anonymity literally doubles the number of people who join, doubles the number of contributions
are doubles the quality of the contributions too.
It means their ideas are getting judged on the merit and not the author.
NAOMI:
Quickly over to you, Paul.
PAUL:
Just a quick run through, there were some definite resignation with the rope about the platform
being a tool. The tool isn't a goal in itself. Having a nice shiny platform isn't what you are aiming
for, it is just something to get to where you want to go.
Apparently the smaller professions who want to be heard, a lot of people find that interesting. So
it would appear that they want to be heard and people want to listen so this is where the
platforms you're talking about could do that because you have got people who want to speak,
people who want to listen but they don't have to connect.
These things that you were driving can help plug that gap. The final conversation of peace
which involved quite a few people on the chart was about expanding on your question about
how to engage in those who are maybe less technologically savvy. So that there is quite a lot of
chat about how we do that so you might want to look through the chat after the event.
DR PETER THOMOND:
We will. Just on that point, we run processes and management for devolution - greater
Manchester, and you can check this out on taking charge.org.uk and we had 6 1/2 thousand
members of the public but we also connected with local health watch and local charities and
went into every single one of the localities and in face-to-face workshops and collected
qualitative data in the face-to-face settings.
When we analyse the two datasets the populations were very similar people. These are hard to
reach people, typically, older population, minorities, et cetera. And their contributions,
qualitatively, were not different from the qualitative contributions of those who joined online.
So in that sense, in that particular, Cradley validated that but there is something that has to be
done more broadly within the NHS with these kinds of products.
We had 1900 people engage in this. Is a statistically representative sample size, I think the boys
in here we have as being pretty robust.

JANET:
Thank you so much, I do need to wrap it up there. The conversation just seems to be going in
the right direction and everyone is getting involved in asking the right questions. I just want
everyone to put their hands together and say thank you to Joanne and Peter, you have been so
fantastic and I have so many questions plugging in my head but I do need to play host to my
party.
I just want introduce the next session which is coming up in January, 13 January from 9:30 to
10:30 and will be on DNA of Care and it is with NHS England, the staff experienced team.
So please, everyone join. Thank you for everyone who is joint over the last year and I will wish
you a very big Merry Christmas and we have your fantastic holiday. Thank you so much to our
presenters today and goodbye and have a good weekend.
Thank you, thank you very much.

Edge Talks; December: Transcript: Empowering people to be heard and helping leaders to listen as part of creating the #AHPsMandate

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (13)

Semelhante a Edge Talks; December: Transcript: Empowering people to be heard and helping leaders to listen as part of creating the #AHPsMandate

Semelhante a Edge Talks; December: Transcript: Empowering people to be heard and helping leaders to listen as part of creating the #AHPsMandate (20)

Mais de NHS Horizons

Mais de NHS Horizons (20)

Último

Último (20)

Edge Talks; December: Transcript: Empowering people to be heard and helping leaders to listen as part of creating the #AHPsMandate