Leadership collaboration during health reform: an action learning approach with an interagency group of executives in Tasmania

Article

<< Previous

Next >>

Contents Vol 36(2)

doi:10.1071/AH11022

Journal of the Australian Healthcare & Hospitals Association

	Search




	Advanced Search



	Journal Home

	About the Journal

	Editorial Committee

	Contacts

	For Advertisers



	Content

	Online Early

	Current Issue

	Just Accepted

	All Issues

	Sample Issue



	For Authors

	General Information

	Instructions to Authors

	Submit Article

	Open Access



	For Referees

	Referee Guidelines

	Review Article

	Call for Reviewers




	For Subscribers

	Subscription Prices

	Customer Service

	Print Publication Dates

e-Alerts

Subscribe to our Email Alert or

feeds for the latest journal papers.

Connect with AHR

Connect with CP

Leadership collaboration during health reform: an action learning approach with an interagency group of executives in Tasmania

Siobhan Harpur

Department of Health and Human Services, PO Box 125, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia. Email: siobhan.harpur@dhhs.tas.gov.au

Australian Health Review 36(2) 136-139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AH11022
Submitted: 20 March 2011 Accepted: 20 June 2011 Published: 25 May 2012





	PDF (94 KB) $25



	Export Citation

Print

Abstract

Objective. To use an action learning approach to encourage a group of executive leaders, responsible for the implementation of a state health reform agenda, to consider the leadership required to drive improvement in healthcare services.

Methods. Based on an assertion that knowledge is co-produced and that deliberative and structured conversation can be a mechanism to drive change, an action learning approach was used to facilitate an interagency group of executive leaders, responsible for the implementation of a state health reform agenda, who were encouraged to consider the leadership required to drive improvement in healthcare services.

Results. It was difficult to assert how the group contributed specifically to the implementation of the health reform agenda but individuals gained insights and there was informal resolution of institutional tensions and differences. The method may provide new knowledge to the reform process over time.

Conclusions. Getting the participants together was challenging, which may reflect the reality of time-poor executives, or a low commitment to giving time to structured and deliberative informal dialogue. Further work is required to test this thesis and the action learning approach with other parts of healthcare workforce.

References

[1] Kooiman J. Modern governance. London: Sage; 1993.

[2] Dickinson H, Ham C. Engaging doctors in leadership: review of the literature. Burmingham: Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, University of Birmingham and the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement; 2008.

[3] Denis JL, Lamonthe L, Langley A, The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organisations. Academy of Management Journal 2001; 44: 809–937.

[4] Department of Health and Human Services. Tasmania’s Health Plan. Available at http://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/thp2007 [verified 21 March 2009].

[5] Department of Health and Human Services. Connecting Care. Available at http://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/about_the_department/our_plans_and_strategies/chronic_disease_strategy [verified 14 August 2010].

[6] Harpur S. Leadership for health. [School of Management, University of Tasmania. Preliminary Research Proposal for PhD 2009.]

[7] Bridgman P, Davis G. The Australian public policy handbook. 2nd ed. St. Leonards: Allen and Unwin; 2000.

[8] Hyde J. How to make the rhetoric of joined-up government really work. Aust New Zealand Health Policy 2008; 5: 22.
| CrossRef |

[9] Bell S. Appropriate policy knowledge, and institutional and governance implication. Australian Journal of Public Administration 2004; 63: 22–8.
| CrossRef |

[10] Mintzberg H. The structuring of organisations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1979.

[11] Dowton BS. Leadership in medicine: where are the leaders? Med J Aust 2004; 181: 652–4.

[12] Braithwaite J. L(H) #Σ (m¹, m²...mn). Leadership in Health Services 2008; 21(1): 8–15. 10.1108/17511870810845860

[13] Braithwaite J, Westbrook JI, et al The development, design, testing, refinement, stimulation and application of an evaluation framework for communities of practice and social professional networks. BMC Health Serv Res 2009; 9: 162.
| CrossRef |

[14] Degeling P, Maxwell S, Kennedy J, Coyle B. Medicine management and modernisation “a danse macabre”? BMJ 2003; 326: 649–52.
| CrossRef |

[15] The David McDaid LSE Health and Social Care, Department of Health. England. Tackling health inequalities: 10 years on – a review of the developments in tackling health inequalities in England over the last 10 years. London: Department of Health; 2009.

[16] Arnstein SR. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 1969; 35: 216–24.
| CrossRef |

[17] Keating M. Reshaping service delivery. In: Davis G, Weller P, editors. Are you being served: state citizens and governance. St Leonards: Allen and Unwin; 2001. pp. 112–6.

[18] Stone D. Policy paradox. Revised ed. New York: WW Norton & Company Inc.; 2002.

[19] Reason P, Bradbury H. Handbook of action research. London: Sage; 2007.

[20] Bevan H, Plsek P, Winstanley L. Leading large scale change: a practical guide part 1. London: NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement.

[21] Fischer F. Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.

[22] Owen H. Open space technology, a user’s guide. San Francisco: Berrett-Joehler Publishers Inc.; 1997.

[23] Owen H. The practice of peace. Melbourne: Open Space Institutes; 2003.

Subscriber Login

	Username: Password:

Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help