280 likes | 381 Vues
A-Z of Commissioning. C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support. October 2010. Outline. Introduction and context Theory and concepts Benefits Practical tips Case study Group exercise. C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support. I. Introduction and context. Introduction.
E N D
A-Z of Commissioning C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support October 2010
Outline Introduction and context Theory and concepts Benefits Practical tips Case study Group exercise
C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support I. Introduction and context
C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support II. Theory and concepts
Senior-level Commitment and Support “It is crucial to build senior-level support for the commissioning process and its resulting change. One of the leadership skills required for commissioners is the ability to create commitment to the commissioning framework and supporting activities across the whole system through negotiation, persuasion and communication.” Good Commissioning: Principles and Practice Commissioning Support Programme 2010
Bottom of “in-tray” Anxiety and frustration Haphazard efforts and false starts A fast start that fizzles out Building PROFESSIONAL Commitment Pressure for Change Capacity for Change Vision and Benefits Actionable First Steps
Poor understandingand no buy-in Inertia to change and slow start Bumpy ride andconstant challenge Little personal commitment Building PERSONAL Commitment Clear andSimple Energy,Enthusiasmand Hope PersonalGoals PersonalStyle
C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support III. Benefits
Benefits to Commissioning • Make change happen faster • Make difficult decisions e.g. de-commissioning • Give priority to the right things e.g. prevention • Re-align resources more easily e.g.workforce development • Motivate other partners within the local partnership • Secure resources e.g. pool budgets • Take calculated risks e.g. Budget Holding Lead Professionals devolving budgets nearer to the front-line
C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support IV. Practical tips
Types of Resistance Cognitive Ideological Psychological Power Driven
Types of Resistance • Cognitive • People truly believe, based on their own information and experience, that the diagnosis and action plan are wrong • Ideological • People believe that the proposed change violates fundamental values that have made the organisation what it is • Psychological • People are reticent to try new things which may be less successful than the previous ones; they see the costs of changing greater than the benefits; they have a low level of tolerance to uncertainty • PowerDriven • People perceive that the proposed change will lead to a loss of power, autonomy and self control – reducing their status
Controlling Collaborating Compromising Avoiding Accommodating Modes of Conflict-Handling Behaviour assertiveness cooperativeness Source: Adapted from Thomas and Kilmann
C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support V. Case study
Case Study 1 – Background • A local area partnership in the North West is making good progress with re-organising children’s services using the Think Family approach to co-ordinate and support families with multiple needs. • They are also making excellent progress with the common assessment framework, lead professionals and integrated working. • The Chief Executive of the Council has invited consultants to help with efficiency savings which includes de-layering management across all services and targeting areas that are perceived to be ineffective. Members have been critical of the number of agencies involved with the same families for long periods without apparent progress. • The Director of Children’s Services disagrees with this approach to efficiency savings in the partnership. She does recognise the need to reduce budgets but wants to do this using a commissioning based approach which reviews the total resource and redesigns services on the basis of local needs and priorities.
Case Study 1 – What they did • The Director of Children’s Services shared the budget pressures with the Board and outlined her strategy for using a commissioning based approach to reducing the budget. • She worked with the Board to identify where the resistance would come from for taking this approach – mindful of the need to agree an urgent plan with the Chief Executive. • The Board agreed to accelerate their work using the Think Family approach for other priority areas. They would look at the whole system that needs to change to deliver better outcomes. Further integrated working and effective joining up of services could help release resources. • The Board re-iterated the principles that they would use to make decisions i.e. commissioning based decisions, outcomes focused, lean and efficient, with continual investment in prevention.
Case Study 1 – What happened • The Director of Children’s Services took the initiative to meet with the Chief Executive and the Lead Member for Children’s Services. • She set out the approach agreed with the Board and was able to use this to agree a collaborative approach to efficiency savings between the Council and other partners. • Together, the DCS, the Chief Executive and the Lead Member were able to deal with different kinds of objections and resistance to this approach from Members and Other Chief Officers. • The Lead Member, supported by the DCS and CE, produced a paper for the Cabinet outlining the rationale for a collaborative approach with the Board. His active involvement in the partnership meant that he was confident with the arguments and able to make the political case for a process that could deliver better outcomes as well as efficiencies and meet the local political manifesto.
Case Study 1 – So What? • The partnerships commissioning process was found to be capable of making robust changes to the whole system based on needs, outcomes and effective service planning. • The savings identified protected the most vulnerable children and families and gave them support to meet their needs in a holistic and sustainable way. • The Think Family approach helped to establish a framework for reducing single agency interventions in complex cases and reviewing the effectiveness of integrated working. • Resources for preventative work have been generated and used to provide a wider range of support to children and young people.
Case Study 2 – Midford • You are a lead member in a small unitary authority • 11 secondary schools: two of which are failing schools • Declining school rolls overall • Midford First Party has a large majority, in administration for 9 years • There is a new Director of Children’s Services
Case Study 2 – Ashley School • The school is set in an affluent area of Midford in splendid grounds. Low but steady numbers (650), it is the only school in the borough with spaces. • Foundation school with 5 politicians on the governing body, including the Lead Member • One of the longest running schools (5 years) in the country in special measures • A number of interventions have been tried in the past including the appointment of a super-head and forming an Interim Executive Board • A new head and a private partner have now been appointed • A capital Targeted Bid of £7m has been won and building work is under way
Case Study 2 – Bitton School • Situated in the centre of Midford, in cramped accommodation with little playground space, in an area of deprivation • Reasonable admission numbers with approx 850 pupils • Recently went into special measures following departure of a charismatic Head • New head teacher, weak senior management team • School refuses support from the local authority
C7. Senior-level Commitment and Support VI. Group exercise
1. Children’s Partnership. South East England • Emotional health and well-being was identified as a key priority in local partnership plan for children and young people. • Objectives cover: improvements in current pathways for children with disabilities, SEN, mental health needs and long term physical conditions; prevention such as promoting positive parenting; and ensuring children are safe from bullying and harassment • Much of the current provision by partners is for specialist and targeted services • The CAMHS strategic commissioner needs to secure the partnership’s commitment to preventative measures. This has to be done within budget constraints.
2. Children’s Partnership. West Midlands • The County is experiencing high levels of Anti-Social Behaviour and the Borough Commander has brought this issue to the board of the local children’s partnership • She has also taken the issue to the Crime and Disorder Partnership (CDRP) and having analysed the data on the offenders has concluded that they are young people, some of whom are NEET, many are from the poorer area in the County and all of them are not achieving well in school • The Borough Commander is looking to secure senior-level commitment and support within the local children’s partnership to help address this problem. CDRP interventions appear to be short term and cannot be sustained.
Group Exercise • Choose from one of these two examples. In your group explore the scenario and reflect on the following questions: • Who are the key players that need to be committed to the necessary actions? • What is likely to reduce senior-level commitment and support? • What might be the professional and personal factors that influence senior-level commitment? • What strategies would you use if you were leading on the issue to gain the senior-level commitment of other partners?