Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34339429›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Promoting inter-organisational knowledge sharing: A qualitative evaluation of England's Global Digital Exemplar and Fast Follower Programme.

Susan Hinder, Kathrin Cresswell, Aziz Sheikh, Bryony Dean Franklin, Marta Krasuska, Hung The Nguyen, Wendy Lane, Hajar Mozaffar, Kathy Mason, Sally Eason and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Susan HinderInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8451-2027
Kathrin CresswellUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Aziz SheikhUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Bryony Dean FranklinSchool of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2892-1245
Marta KrasuskaUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Hung The NguyenInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Wendy LaneNational Health Service Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Warwick, United Kingdom.
Hajar MozaffarBusiness School, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Kathy MasonNational Health Service Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Warwick, United Kingdom.
Sally EasonNational Health Service Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Warwick, United Kingdom.
Henry W W PottsInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Robin WilliamsInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9044-4611

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Global Digital Exemplar (GDE) Programme was designed to promote the digitisation of hospital services in England. Selected provider organisations that were reasonably digitally-mature were funded with the expectation that they would achieve internationally recognised levels of excellence and act as exemplars ('GDE sites') and share their learning with somewhat less digitally-mature Fast Follower (FF) sites.

aimsThis paper explores how partnerships between GDE and FF sites have promoted knowledge sharing and learning between organisations.

methodsWe conducted an independent qualitative longitudinal evaluation of the GDE Programme, collecting data across 36 provider organisations (including acute, mental health and speciality), 12 of which we studied as in-depth ethnographic case studies. We used a combination of semi-structured interviews with programme leads, vendors and national policy leads, non-participant observations of meetings and workshops, and analysed national and local documents. This allowed us to explore both how inter-organisational learning and knowledge sharing was planned, and how it played out in practice. Thematic qualitative analysis, combining findings from diverse data sources, was facilitated by NVivo 11 and drew on sociotechnical systems theory.

resultsFormally established GDE and FF partnerships were perceived to enhance learning and accelerate adoption of technologies in most pairings. They were seen to be most successful where they had encouraged, and were supported by, informal knowledge networking, driven by the mutual benefits of information sharing. Informal networking was enhanced where the benefits were maximised (for example where paired sites had implemented the same technological system) and networking costs minimised (for example by geographical proximity, prior links and institutional alignment). Although the intervention anticipated uni-directional learning between exemplar sites and 'followers', in most cases we observed a two-way flow of information, with GDEs also learning from FFs, through informal networking which also extended to other health service providers outside the Programme. The efforts of the GDE Programme to establish a learning ecosystem has enhanced the profile of shared learning within the NHS.

conclusionsInter-organisational partnerships have produced significant gains for both follower (FF) and exemplar (GDE) sites. Formal linkages were most effective where they had facilitated, and were supported by, informal networking. Informal networking was driven by the mutual benefits of information sharing and was optimised where sites were well aligned in terms of technology, geography and culture. Misalignments that created barriers to networking between organisations in a few cases were attributed to inappropriate choice of partners. Policy makers seeking to promote learning through centrally directed mechanisms need to create a framework that enables networking and informal knowledge transfer, allowing local organisations to develop bottom-up collaboration and exchanges, where they are productive, in an organic manner.

Indexed as

Health ServicesInformation DisseminationKnowledgeOrganizationsQualitative ResearchEnglandGeographyPeer GroupTechnology

Identifiers

PMID34339429
PMCPMC8328305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.