Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Education And Debate

Developing learning organisations in the new NHS

BMJ 2000; 320 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7240.998 (Published 08 April 2000) Cite this as: BMJ 2000;320:998

Rapid Response:

Organisational develpment in the new NHS - the learning paradox

The authors provided a welcome introductory overview to
organisational development in the NHS. They rightly summarised that most
NHS learning takes place at 'single loop level' by individuals (for health
professionals at least) through a continuing professional development
capacity; they also called for empirical evidence to help inform future
practice. The authors however shed no new light as to NHS organisations
could take forward plans to develop as a learning organisation. Calling
on theoretical perspectives (Senge, Mintzberg, Argyris and Shon,et al) is
important and makes interesting reading, yet fails to address the learning
paradox evident in the NHS: how do we transfer learning at an individual level so that groups
within the organisation can benefit?
Transfer learning from one NHS organisation to others?

Learning in the NHS is a human endeavour and yet the authors state
that learning is achieved by the organisation. This begs the question
which part(s) of the organisation and by whom? How do you measure this
learning? What are the ‘structure, routines and norms’, by which the
organisation embodies learning? It will be important to clarify the
extent and nature of these internal processes that are so vital to the
health of an organisation.

The authors stated ‘learning organisations do not focus exclusively
on correcting problems.. They aim for more fundamental shifts..’ Just who
are ‘they’ of an organisation? Does it matter who ‘they’ are? What is the
modus operandi of ‘they’ in an NHS organisation?

We recently carried out a needs assessment review of nursing and PAM
staff within our Trust. We were interested in what the educational needs
were and how best to manage expectation within resources. The report
identified that there was considerable divide in opinion as how best to
manage practice development (1). In short, there would have to be a
multifaceted approach to clinical practice development throughout the
Trust. Furthermore, we have used this review to inform our management
practice.

If we are to invest (even possible divest) NHS resources to
management albeit for all encompassing educational goals, we must ensure
that research tackles the important issue of translation: to what extent
can we apply lessons leaned in one Trust to other Trusts in the country.
We must therefore apply ‘double loop learning’ and even meta loop learning
on the very process we are extolling

One further technical point: one of the six conclusions (commitment
to team learning) is already being addressed in England through a recent
consultation exercise (2) and the merging of medical, nursing and PAM
training budgets.

References

Ref (2) Loughlan C, Ford J Improving your practice - a needs assessment
review of nursing and PAMs University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke’s NHS
Trust 1999

Ref (1) ‘A Health Service for All: Developing the NHS Workforce’
Consultation Document on the Review of Workforce Planning Department of
Health 2000

Conflict of interest
none

Competing interests: No competing interests

08 August 2000
Christopher Loughlan
R&D and Teaching Manager
Addenbrooke's NHS Trust, Cambridge