Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:27:09.428Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Being Autonomous and Having Space in which to Act: Commissioning in the ‘New NHS’ in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 August 2017

KATH CHECKLAND ,
RINITA DAM ,
JON HAMMOND ,
ANNA COLEMAN ,
JULIA SEGAR ,
NICHOLAS MAYS  and
PAULINE ALLEN
KATH CHECKLAND
Affiliation:
Centre for Primary Care, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL email: [email protected]
RINITA DAM
Affiliation:
Centre for Primary Care, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL email: [email protected]
JON HAMMOND
Affiliation:
Centre for Primary Care, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL email: [email protected]
ANNA COLEMAN
Affiliation:
Centre for Primary Care, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL email: [email protected]
JULIA SEGAR
Affiliation:
Centre for Primary Care, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL email: [email protected]
NICHOLAS MAYS
Affiliation:
Department of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15–17 Tavistock Place, LondonWC1H 9SH email: [email protected]
PAULINE ALLEN
Affiliation:
Department of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15–17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The optimal balance between central governmental authority and the degree of autonomy of local public bodies is an enduring issue in public policy. The UK National Health Service is no exception, with NHS history, in part at least, a history of repeated cycles of centralisation and decentralisation of decision-making power. Most recently, a significant reorganisation of the NHS in 2012–13 was built around the creation of new and supposedly more autonomous commissioning organisations (Clinical Commissioning Groups – CCGs). Using Bossert's (1998) concept of ‘decision space’, we explored the experiences of local commissioners as they took on their new responsibilities. We interviewed commissioning staff from all of the CCGs in two regional health care ‘economies’, exploring their perceptions of autonomy and their experiences over time. We found significant early enthusiasm for, and perceptions of, increased autonomy tempered in the vertical dimension by increasingly onerous and prescriptive monitoring regimes, and in the horizontal dimension by the proliferation of overlapping networks, inter-organisational groups and relationships. We propose that, whatever the balance between central and local control that is adopted, complex public services require some sort of meso-level oversight from organisations able to ‘hold the ring’ between competing interests and to take a regional view of the needs of the local health system. This suggests that local organisational autonomy in such services will always be constrained.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 377 - 395
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, E.R. (1998), ‘A structuration theory of interorganizational coordination: cases in environmental management’, The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 6: 4, 334–354.Google Scholar
Allen, P. (2006), ‘New localism in the English National Health Service: What is it for?’, Health Policy, 79: 2–3, 244–252.Google Scholar
Allen, P., Keen, J., Wright, J., Dempster, P., Townsend, J., Hutchings, A., Street, A. and Verzulli, R. (2012), ‘Investigating the governance of autonomous public hospitals in England: multi-site case study of NHS foundation trusts’, Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 17: 2, 94–100.Google Scholar
Axelsson, R. (2000), ‘The organizational pendulum: Healthcare management in Sweden 1865 -1998’, Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 28: 1, 47–53.Google Scholar
Bevan, G. and Hood, C. (2006), ‘What's measured is what matters: targets and gaming in the english public health care system’, Public Administration, 84: 3, 517–538.Google Scholar
Black, N. and Mays, N. (2016), ‘Sustainability and transformation plans: a troubled start’, BMJ, 355.Google Scholar
Bossert, T. (1998), ‘Analyzing the decentralization of health systems in developing countries: Decision space, innovation and performance’, Social Science and Medicine, 47: 10, 1513–1527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cambridge online dictionary. (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/autonomy) accessed 7/4/17Google Scholar
Checkland, K., Harrison, S., Snow, S., McDermott, I. and Coleman, A. (2012), ‘Commissioning in the English National Health Service: What's the Problem?’, Journal of Social Policy, 41: 03, 533–550.Google Scholar
Checkland, K., Allen, P., Coleman, A., Segar, J., McDermott, I., Harrison, S., Petsoulas, C. and Peckham, S. (2013), ‘Accountable to whom, for what? An exploration of the early development of Clinical Commissioning Groups in the English NHS’, BMJ Open, 3: 12.Google Scholar
Checkland, K., McDermott, I., Coleman, A. and Perkins, N. (2016a), ‘Complexity in the new NHS: longitudinal case studies of CCGs in England’, BMJ Open, 6: 1.Google Scholar
Checkland, K., Segar, J., Voorhees, J. and Coleman, A. (2016b), ‘‘Like a Circle in a Spiral, Like a Wheel within a Wheel’: The Layers of Complexity and Challenge for Devolution of Health and Social Care in Greater Manchester’, Representation, 1–17.Google Scholar
De Vries, M.S. (2000), ‘The rise and fall of decentralization: A comparative analysis of arguments and practices in European countries’, European Journal of Political Research, 38: 2, 193– 224.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2005), A short guide to NHS Foundation Trusts, London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2010), Equity and Excellence: liberating the NHS, London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
Department of Health (webarchive) (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/Browsable/DH_4949934). online resource, accessed 7/4/17Google Scholar
Dixon, A., Storey, J. and Alvarez Rosete, A. (2010), ‘Accountability of Foundation Trusts in the English NHS: Views of Directors and Governors’, Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 15: 2, 82–89.Google Scholar
Exworthy, M. and Frosini, F. (2008), ‘Room for manoeuvre?: Explaining local autonomy in the English National Health Service’, Health Policy, 86: 2–3, 204–212.Google Scholar
Exworthy, M., Frosini, F., Jones, L., Peckham, S., Powell, M., Greener, I., Anand, K. and Holloway, J. (2010), Decentralisation and Performance: Autonomy and Incentives in Local Health Economies: NIHR Service Deliery and Organisation Programme.Google Scholar
Exworthy, M., Frosini, F. and Jones, L. (2011), ‘Are NHS foundation trusts able and willing to exercise autonomy? ‘You can take a horse to water. . .’’, Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 16: 4, 232–237.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. and Ahmad, W.I.U. (2000), ‘Medical autonomy and the UK state 1975 to 2025’, Sociology, 34: 1, 129–146.Google Scholar
Hoque, K., Davis, S. and Humphreys, M. (2004), ‘Freedom to do What you are Told: Senior Management Team Autonomy in an NHS Acute Trust’, Public Administration, 82: 2, 355–375.Google Scholar
Klein, R. (2013), The new politics of the NHS: from creation to reinvention (7th edition), London: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, F., Exworthy, M., Wilmott, M. and Greenhalgh, T. (2011), ‘Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose: senior NHS managers’ narratives of restructuring’, Sociology of Health & Illness, 33: 6, 914–929.Google Scholar
Mannion, R., Goddard, M. and Bate, A. (2007), ‘Aligning incentives and motivations in health care: the case of earned autonomy’, Financial Accountability & Management, 23: 4, 401–420.Google Scholar
Mosca, I. (2005), ‘Is decentralisation the real solution?’, Health Policy, 77: 1, 113–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NHS England (2012), Health and Social Care Act 2012: Fact Sheets https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-and-social-care-act-2012-fact-sheets Google Scholar
NHS England (2013), Draft framework of excellence in clinical commissioning, Nov 2013.Google Scholar
NHS England (2014), Five year forward view, Leeds: NHS England.Google Scholar
NHS England (2015), Delivering the Forward View: NHS planning guidance 2016/17 to 2020/21 Leeds: NHS England.Google Scholar
NHS England (2016), The forward view into action: New Care Models: update and initial support, Leeds: NHS England.Google Scholar
Peckham, S., Exworthy, M., Greener, I. and Powell, M. (2005), ‘Decentralizing Health Services: More Local Accountability or Just More Central Control?’, Public Money & Management, 25: 4, 221–228.Google Scholar
Petsoulas, C., Allen, P., Checkland, K., Coleman, A., Segar, J., Peckham, S. and McDermott, I. (2014), ‘Views of NHS commissioners on commissioning support provision. Evidence from a qualitative study examining the early development of clinical commissioning groups in England.’, BMJ Open, 4: e005970.Google Scholar
Powell, M. (2016), ‘Order of change in the ordered changes in the NHS’, in Exworthy, M., Mannion, R. and Powell, M. (eds.), Dismantling the NHS? Evaluating the impact of health reforms, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Secretary of State for Health (2000), The NHS plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform, London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
Speed, E. and Gabe, J. (2013), ‘The Health and Social Care Act for England 2012: The extension of ‘new professionalism’’, Critical Social Policy, 33: 3, 564–574.Google Scholar
Timmins, N. (2012), Never again? The story of the Health and Social Care Act 2012. A study in coalition government and policy making., London The King's Fund.Google Scholar
Verhoest, K., Peters, B.G., Bouckaert, G. and Verschuere, B. (2004), ‘The study of organisational autonomy: a conceptual review’, Public Administration and Development, 24: 2, 101–118.Google Scholar
Walshe, K., Coleman, A., McDonald, R., Lorne, C. and Munford, L. (2016), ‘Health and social care devolution: the Greater Manchester experiment’, BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online), 352: i1495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walshe, K. (2017), ‘Sustainability and transformation plans for the NHS in England: radical or wishful thinking?’, BMJ, 356.Google Scholar
Weiss, C.H. (1999), ‘The Interface Between Evaluation and Public Policy’, Evaluation, 5: 4, 468–486.Google Scholar