JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for AAHPN Archives


AAHPN Archives

AAHPN Archives


AAHPN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

AAHPN Home

AAHPN Home

AAHPN  December 2011

AAHPN December 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Performance management

From:

Kenneth Thompson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:56:32 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

How do you determine who the bad performers are without putting everyone on edge. Demmings line was that if you wanted to improve system performance, first drive out fear?



Ken

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry



-----Original Message-----

From: Adam Oliver <[log in to unmask]>

Sender: Anglo-American Health Policy Network <[log in to unmask]>

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:33:46 

To: <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-to: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Performance management



I actually think it's the other way around. For persistent bad

performers, you might usefully employ naming and shaming (or at least

some kind of close scrutiny). For one-off bad performers, the poor event

may be just be down to bad luck, or a temporary slip, so you don't need

to worry about it so much. 



-----Original Message-----

From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 

Sent: 15 December 2011 12:31

To: Oliver,AJ; [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Performance management



Presumably the question relates to whether you are talking about one-off

poor performance events, where 'blaming' would probably work, as it may

help get the person back on track, and persistent poor performance,

where there is a deeper underlying issue which blaming isn't likley to

do much for?

-----Original Message-----

From:         Adam Oliver <[log in to unmask]>

Sender:       Anglo-American Health Policy Network

<[log in to unmask]>

Date:         Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:24:50 

To: <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:     [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Performance management



I do think there is something in naming and shaming against persistence

'offenders', providing that it is done carefully. 



However, my question arose really because, Kahneman points out that a

lot of the time, people think that blaming works, when it's really

mainly regression to the mean. For example, in one of his examples,

Israeli pilots who flew badly got severely scolded by their flight

instructors, and the next time they flew, they improved. But this was

because there is very little chance that a pilot will fly badly

consecutively twice - if you say nothing to them, or praise them, they

are also likely to improve after a bad flight. So I was speculating

whether something similar happens in health care. 



-----Original Message-----

From: Anglo-American Health Policy Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

On Behalf Of Calum Paton

Sent: 15 December 2011 12:12

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Performance management



Ken, interesting, thinking of your observation.....



Is there a difference between 'naming and shaming' the 'poor bloody 

infantry' (eg on production lines) and naming and shaming 'bosses' eg

Chief 

Executives of NHS hospitals....the latter  receiving a lot of prominence

in 

the English NHS  (more than the rest of the UK) a few years ago - and,

now, 

in the academic literature - as to whether 'targets' (and 'terror')

worked 

(eg work by Bevan; Propper...)



The boss (or Board) may after all be responsible for the 'whole 

process'....at least on paper.....but a hospital is of course at the

mercy 

of the wider health polity (eg central control in the English NHS,

whatever 

the prevailing rhetoric) and  also of the more local 'health economy'

(ie 

its local commissioners and meso-level regulators at area or regional 

level)...



A few CEOs/ Executives sought to 'hide defects' (ie fiddle waiting 

lists/times) but that was a dangerous game....



As to whether 'profit' (market) means faster corrective action than

targets 

(state), Max, the jury is so far out, so far, that we don't know, to be 

fair...although the (limited) English NHS-specific evidence from the

2000s 

suggests the latter, state action......and all sorts of questions arise

as 

to - eg- whtehr nursing homes are or are not similar to hospitals, let

alone 

the rest of the economy...



This one will run and run....



Happy Christmas everybody,



Calum





Calum Paton

Professor of Public Policy

School of Public Policy and Professional Practice

Keele University



Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Health Planning and Management



(Wiley Blackwell)



[log in to unmask]



See Calum Paton, 'NHS Confidential: Implementation, or...how great 

expectations in Whitehall are dashed in Stoke-on-Trent', in M. Exworthy

et 

al., Shaping Health Policy: Case Study Methods and Analysis, Policy

Press, 

2011



See special issue of International Journal of Health Planning and 

Management, 26.4, 2011



See Calum Paton, New Labour's State of Health: Political Economy, Public



Policy and the NHS, Ashgate, 2006



-----Original Message----- 

From: Kenneth Thompson

Sent: 15 December 2011 11:36

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Performance management



Hi Adam

My understanding is that Demming had long ago discovered that shaming 

actually impeded any efforts at quality improvement for two reasons

1) most problems in quality were in fact related to systematic problems

in 

process

2) the introduction of shame/fear actually encouraged people to hide

defects 

or created conflict as blame was assigned.

Have these ideas been stood on their head?



Ken



Sent from my iPad



On Dec 15, 2011, at 6:07 AM, Adam Oliver <[log in to unmask]> wrote:



> There is a lot of talk/analysis etc at the moment on whether shaming

> people for bad performance can improve performance. It seems to, but

> could the improved performance of poor performers be at least in part

> explained by regression to the mean? We probably need to have some

kind

> of controlled experiment, one arm that uses encouragement of bad

> performers, and another arm that uses shaming. We could then see which

> (if any) has differential effect. It would be an important thing to

do,

> across all kinds of sectors and scenarios, I think.

>

> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic 

> communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer 



Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic

communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer



Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic

communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer



Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager