One of the candidates I graduated with from school, 40 years ago has a very successful legal practice, I'm an underemployed I.T. consultant.
I sent him this unsolicited advice.
Not very original of me I know, but I hope it gives a useful insight to them.
First, from my profession of I.T.
A piece of ~1,000wds on the cost to Govt. of essential infrastructure (IT) not fulfilling its promise (slanted more to CBR than QLD):
"The Triple Whammy - the true cost of I.T. Waste"
And a way out of the hole (600wds):
"Controlling Waste in Government I.T. - An Immodest Proposal"
Create two bodies like Aviation has, ATSB/CAA. One to investigate, identify root-causes and write detailed recommendations for remediation, and another to implement and enforce those recommendations...It means making the Audit Office do more than check for fraud/broken regulations and develop real, on-going expertise in essential disciplines, starting with I.T.
And establishing an Independent Authority with real teeth... One of the first actions has to be "start collecting performance and outcome data", like the 15yr old CHAOS report that reports on I.T. project outcomes in the USA.
If people and firms are assessed as incompetent or worse then, like in Aviation, the Govt has the right to de-licence them, only they aren't licenced. But they can be put on a public "not to be employed by Govt." register , which others will know if it is lawful currently or not.
Most importantly the "Authority" has to focus on Change and Improvement, not disciplining and "handing out consequences" (which is part of its remit) or it becomes counter-productive. (900 wds)
"The Accountability Paradox: Personal Consequences and Blame"
It comes down to a basic proposition:
Is it ever acceptable for a Professional to repeat, or allow, a Known Error, Fault or Failure?I'd argue that a number of professions owe a Fiduciary Duty to their clients/patients and professional failures in this way should result in the most serious penalties.
In Aviation, not repeating mistakes is taken very seriously, but not in I.T. nor seemingly in the medical world.
In any Engineering profession, a professional who fails in this way, causing fatalities or allowing preventable economic failure, not only loses their license to practice, but is open to criminal, not just civil, charges.
Secondly, on Public Health and Hospitals.
Urgent reform is needed within Queensland Health, at many levels, but what's been tried over the last 20 years hasn't worked. A radical approach is needed, and one that is known to work.
This is not my area of Professional expertise and I wouldn't know where to start...
But I know who does and how to do it:
Adopt the Aviation model of Systemic Quality and Deliberate Change Implementation.A recent article in the Journal of Patient Safety proposes exactly this:
"An NTSB for Healthcare, Learning from Innovation: Debate and Innovate or Capitulate",
What they don't say is that Systemic Quality (my term) isn't just free, but because it embraces active, intentional learning and improvement, it is better than free:
20% cheaper is well documented.1. Dr Brent James of Intermountain Healthcare. You can read his 2001 ABC interview "Minimising Harm to Patients in Hospital" and his "its 20% cheaper" data.
2. Dr James' work is reflected in a major report by the US Institute of Medicine:
"To Err is Human: Building A Safer Health System" (1999).
3. Donald Berwick and the "Institute for Healthcare Improvement".
Here is a landmark article by Berwick from 1996:
"A primer on leading the improvement of systems"
BMJ VOLUME 312 9 MARCH 1996
Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Boston, MA 02215,USA
Donald M Berwick, president and Chief Executive Officer.
I'm sure you've read the 500 page QPHCI report and possibly Margaret Cunneen SC's "The Patel Case – Implications for the Medical Profession" (which as a layperson I found astounding).
The inherent problem with Commissions of Inquiry is that they cannot oversee or enforce the implementations of their recommendations. The responsibility gets handed back to Govt. which delegates the Change and Improvement process to the organisation that has the problems.This fails a basic sanity test:
If the organisation could've changed itself, it would've.Continuing systemic problems are not the result of lack of knowledge or insight.
Berwick formulates this problem exactly with:
every system is perfectly designed to achieve the results it achieves.The Organisational Rules have to be changed to create more than cosmetic change because the incumbents have both an investment in keeping the status quo (its worked for them) and if they could've changed the system within the existing Rules, they would've.
Changing Organisational Rules, and making them stick, can only come from above.
This is exactly why Dr Demings' "Quality Circles" (and his teachings) worked in Japan and failed in their country of origin, the USA. Deming was hired by the heads of Japanese industry and they were able to mandate the changes.
Some things to kick off reform of QLD Health are:
- assess the degree of compliance with the QPHCI recommendations within 2 weeks.
- Any good bureaucratic will attempt to stall efforts like these for months or years. Think of the HSU Inquiry by Fair Work Australia as an outstanding example.
- look to new laws addressing Patel's deliberate action in harming patients.
- There is also a lesser offence of ' professional incompetence', proven by the statistical outcomes of a doctor. Individual victims cannot be identified, but that there are victims is proven by the stats.