knowledge management strategy at monitor culture, benefits and implications for the new sector...
TRANSCRIPT
Knowledge Management Strategy at MonitorCulture, benefits and implications for the new Sector Regulator3 May 2012
Knowledge Management StrategyBehaviours, culture, ROI
Monitor’s KM strategy and implications for its future roleNeil StutchburyKnowledge Management Director
Monitor, Independent Regulator of NHS Foundation Trusts
Introduction
Overview of Monitor’s role
• Foundation Trust regulation
• Sector regulation
How Monitor uses Knowledge Management for regulating Foundation Trusts
Behaviours, culture, ROI
Implications for new role as Sector regulator
FT regulator: Assessment
Monitor’s work assessing and authorising trusts to continue
Majority of trusts expected to gain FT status by 2014
Monitor will maintain the ‘bar’ for entry standards 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
10
31 32
62
92
117
129137
144
More foundation
trusts
Governors are able to develop
their skills
57% of acute, 73% of mental health and 27% of ambulance trusts are now FTs: FTs have a cumulative turnover in excess of £31.8 billion
Monitor to retain role of FT regulator
Increasing number of FTs means more FTs to regulate
Greater financial pressure on the system – more trusts in difficulty
Monitor to regulate all providers
FT regulator: Compliance
Monitor’s future role
Continuing role as
FT regulator
Sector regulator
role
• Assessing NHS trusts for FT status: Target of 2014
• Regulating FTs: Ongoing
• Price regulation: joint responsibility of Monitor (price levels) and NHS CB (pricing structure)
• Enabling integration: Monitor and commissioners both have responsibility to see that more efficient and coordinated care pathways are created
• Preventing anti-competitive behaviour: Where against the interest of healthcare users, approach will be based on current rules, the PRCC
• Licensing providers: Working with CQC, licence would ensure providers meet required standards
• Continuity of service: New process to protect essential services
As Is (Jan 2010)
Information Management Issues Ownership for shared information was unclear
Information was hard to find
Some information was inaccessible (due to access controls)
No version control: difficult to be sure which is the final version
Unable to perform historical trend analysis because the data was not in one place
Critical knowledge leaves the organisation when people leave
The number of in-year monitoring reports we produce per year is growing
exponentially
Information volumes are growing
As time passes, the situation will only get worse
Vision
A single repository of all Monitor’s information • We store information in one place, • We store information once and re-use it many times• “Single version of the truth”
A culture of sharing our knowledge and information• Our instinct is to share what we know with our colleagues• We all take responsibility for owning and managing
the information we share with others
Benefits• We can find the information and expertise we need to do our jobs• We can trust the information when we’ve found it
Outcomes• Timely and informed decision making: reduced risk• Greater efficiency and productivity• Retention of corporate knowledge
Approach
Business transformation
• Timely and appropriate intervention• Enhanced productivity• Retain corporate memory
• Open information sharing• Nurturing expertise• Information ownership• Good information management
practicesCultural
transformation
• Automated processes• Central information repository• Internal and external informationNew systems
and processes
• Training on systems• Training on IM• Day to day support• Hints and tips, clinics
Training and
Support
To BeA Single Version of the Truth
Information Repository
Assessment MonitoringEscalation/Intervention
External Data
External Partners/
Stakeholders
Internal functions: HR, Comms, Legal,
Policy etc
1 23
Documents
Correspondence Data
connect2: Single Information Repository
• Contacts• Trust status• Portfolio update• Correspondence
CRM
• Emails• Calendars
Exchange
• Monitoring data• Trust data• Healthcare data...
SQL Server
• Documents• Reports• Workflows• Collaboration...
SharePointFTs regulatory compliance returns
Up/downloadtemplates
Documents, links
Reports
Email, Calendar
ContactsTracked emails
Portfolio updates
Reports
Templates
Alerts
Contacts
Docs
Updates
AD
Browser interface
MS Office
Outlook
Overall Timeline
Develop KM
Strategy
Plan and
tender for
partner
Development and implementation
Exploitation and benefits
Jan 10 May 10 Nov 10 Oct 11
connect2:Intranet
connect2:Assessment
connect2:Compliance
connect2:Monitor
Impl in SP 2010
Develop
Develop
HR, Comms, Legal etc
Pilot Live
LiveTest
N D J F M A M J J A
2010 2011
Benefits
Financial
Non-Financial
Measureable Non-Measureable
£370k saving from retiring legacy systems and services
10% productivity improvement in quarterly monitoring
Faster to create Assessment board decision packs
Time saved finding information
More timely, richer internal communications
Capturing and sharing knowledge
Faster and richer induction for new starters
Reduced risk of making inappropriate or untimely regulatory decisions
Faster to respond to FOI requests and MP questions
KM Culture and Behaviours
KM culture must align to corporate values• Monitor: “professional”, “open”, “collaborative”
Our KM culture • Open information sharing• Valuing each other’s expertise and knowledge• Our instinct is to share what we know
Required behaviours• People save their work in connect2 for sharing with others• Take responsibility for own information • Annotate documents with metadata• Look up information in connect2 first; ask second • Organisation recognises and rewards collaborative behaviours
KM Examples
Trust “e-diaries”
Track meetings with stakeholders
connect2 champions
All FT information in one place
Track all FOI data requests
Knowledge sessions
Implications for Monitor’s new role
Changes to KM strategy• Shared systems and data with partners (NHS CB, CQC, IC, CCGs…)• More complex organisation (4-5 times larger)
New business systems required for new functions• Licencing providers (with CQC)• Pricing system (with PBR team, NHS CB)• Integrated services and competition analysis (with CCP, NHS CB, CCGs)• Continuity of service
New compliance process required for licencing regime
Timely access to quality information will be a critical success factor
Monitor relationships - today
FT regulation
Regulating FTs
Responsibility for ensuring patients have access to quality services
Providers
Monitor relationships - tomorrow
Pricing, protecting against anti-competitive behaviour
Data sharing
LicencingFT regulation
Integration & protecting against anti-competitive behaviour
Regulating FTsLicensing, protecting against anti-competitive behaviour
Protect and promote patients interests
Responsibility for ensuring patients have access to quality services
Clinical Commissioning Groups
Patients
Providers
Conclusions
Developed and delivered a KM strategy for Monitor which has centralised its information capture, improved productivity and reduced risk of poor decision making
Monitor is gearing up to meet its responsibilities in the Health and Social Care Act 2012: information and collaboration across the health service is going to be critical
Thank you for listening
Any questions?