Professional Practice in Learning and Development: How to Design and Deliver Plans for the Workplace

Introduction The world is changing! It is volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. As cliché as it may sound the evidence of such dynamism in the external environment is growing. Business-as-usual is more of the exception than the norm. Organizational change is the rule; be it to accommodate and adapt to change, or instigate and lead change. A constantly changing environment is a situation that all organizations have to live with. What makes some organizations however, able to thrive better than others? Many scholars and practitioners believe that this is due to the ability to learn. Therefore, this book on developing Learning and Development (L&D) professionals is timely as it explores and discusses trends and practices that impact organizations, the workforce and L&D professionals. Being able to learn and develop effectively is the cornerstone of motivation as it helps to address people’s need to be competent and to be autonomous (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Loon & Casimir, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000). L&D stimulates and empowers people to perform. Organizations that are better at learning at all levels; the individual, group and organizational level, will always have a better chance of surviving and performing. Given the new reality of a dynamic external environment and constant change, L&D professionals now play an even more important role in their organizations than ever before. However, L&D professionals themselves are not immune to the turbulent changes as their practices are also impacted. Therefore, the challenges that L&D professionals face are two-pronged. Firstly, in relation to helping and supporting their organization and its workforce in adapting to the change, whilst, secondly developing themselves effectively and efficiently so that they are able to be one-step ahead of the workforce that they are meant to help develop. These challenges are recognised by the CIPD, as they recently launched their new L&D qualification that has served as an inspiration for this book. L&D plays a crucial role at both strategic (e.g. organizational capability) and operational (e.g. delivery of training) levels. L&D professionals have moved from being reactive (e.g. following up action after performance appraisals) to being more proactive (e.g. shaping capability). L&D is increasingly viewed as a driver for organizational performance. The CIPD (2014) suggest that L&D is increasingly expected to not only take more responsibility but also accountability for building both individual and organizational knowledge and capability, and to nurture an organizational culture that prizes learning and development. This book is for L&D professionals. Nonetheless, it is also suited for those studying Human Resource Development HRD at intermediate level. The term ‘Human Resource Development’ (HRD) is more common in academia, and is largely synonymous with L&D (Stewart & Sambrook, 2012) Stewart (1998) defined HRD as ‘the practice of HRD is constituted by the deliberate, purposive and active interventions in the natural learning process. Such interventions can take many forms, most capable of categorising as education or training or development’ (p. 9). In fact, many parts of this book (e.g. Chapters 5 and 7) are appropriate for anyone who is involved in training and development. This may include a variety of individuals within the L&D community, such as line managers, professional trainers, training solutions vendors, instructional designers, external consultants and mentors (Mayo, 2004). The CIPD (2014) goes further as they argue that the role of L&D is broad and plays a significant role in Organizational Development (OD) and Talent Management (TM), as well as in Human Resource Management (HRM) in general. OD, TM, HRM and L&D are symbiotic in enabling the ‘people management function’ to provide organizations with the capabilities that they need.

Improving Patients’ Experience and Outcome of Total Joint Replacement: the RESTORE Programme

BACKGROUND: Total hip replacements (THRs) and total knee replacements (TKRs) are common elective procedures. In the REsearch STudies into the ORthopaedic Experience (RESTORE) programme, we explored the care and experiences of patients with osteoarthritis after being listed for THR and TKR up to the time when an optimal outcome should be expected. OBJECTIVE: To undertake a programme of research studies to work towards improving patient outcomes after THR and TKR. METHODS: We used methodologies appropriate to research questions: systematic reviews, qualitative studies, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), feasibility studies, cohort studies and a survey. Research was supported by patient and public involvement. RESULTS: Systematic review of longitudinal studies showed that moderate to severe long-term pain affects about 7–23% of patients after THR and 10–34% after TKR. In our cohort study, 10% of patients with hip replacement and 30% with knee replacement showed no clinically or statistically significant functional improvement. In our review of pain assessment few research studies used measures to capture the incidence, character and impact of long-term pain. Qualitative studies highlighted the importance of support by health and social professionals for patients at different stages of the joint replacement pathway. Our review of longitudinal studies suggested that patients with poorer psychological health, physical function or pain before surgery had poorer long-term outcomes and may benefit from pre-surgical interventions. However, uptake of a pre-operative pain management intervention was low. Although evidence relating to patient outcomes was limited, comorbidities are common and may lead to an increased risk of adverse events, suggesting the possible value of optimising pre-operative management. The evidence base on clinical effectiveness of pre-surgical interventions, occupational therapy and physiotherapy-based rehabilitation relied on small RCTs but suggested short-term benefit. Our feasibility studies showed that definitive trials of occupational therapy before surgery and post-discharge group-based physiotherapy exercise are feasible and acceptable to patients. Randomised trial results and systematic review suggest that patients with THR should receive local anaesthetic infiltration for the management of long-term pain, but in patients receiving TKR it may not provide additional benefit to femoral nerve block. From a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, local anaesthetic infiltration was a cost-effective treatment in primary THR. In qualitative interviews, patients and health-care professionals recognised the importance of participating in the RCTs. To support future interventions and their evaluation, we conducted a study comparing outcome measures and analysed the RCTs as cohort studies. Analyses highlighted the importance of different methods in treating and assessing hip and knee osteoarthritis. There was an inverse association between radiographic severity of osteoarthritis and pain and function in patients waiting for TKR but no association in THR. Different pain characteristics predicted long-term pain in THR and TKR. Outcomes after joint replacement should be assessed with a patient-reported outcome and a functional test. CONCLUSIONS: The RESTORE programme provides important information to guide the development of interventions to improve long-term outcomes for patients with osteoarthritis receiving THR and TKR. Issues relating to their evaluation and the assessment of patient outcomes are highlighted. Potential interventions at key times in the patient pathway were identified and deserve further study, ultimately in the context of a complex intervention.

Deconstruction-reconstruction of Computer Game and Immersive Environment Semiotics

Computer game technology produces compelling ‘immersive environments’ where our digitally-native youth play and explore. Players absorb visual, auditory and other signs and process these in real time, making rapid choices on how to move through the game-space to experience ‘meaningful play’. How can immersive environments be designed to elicit perception and understanding of signs? In this paper we explore game design and gameplay from a semiotic perspective, focusing on the creation of meaning for players as they play the game. We propose a theory of game design based on semiotics.

Healthcare Staffs’ Experiences and Perceptions of Caring for People with Dementia in the Acute Setting: Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

Background Dementia is a global issue, with increasing prevalence rates impacting on health services internationally. People with dementia are frequently admitted to hospital, an environment that may not be suited to their needs. While many initiatives have been developed to improve their care in the acute setting, there is a lack of cohesive understanding of how staff experience and perceive the care they give to people with dementia in the acute setting. Objectives The aim of this qualitative synthesis was to explore health care staffs’ experiences and perceptions of caring for people with dementia in the acute setting. Qualitative synthesis can bring together isolated findings in a meaningful way that can inform policy development. Settings A screening process, using inclusion/exclusion criteria, identified qualitative studies that focused on health care staff caring for people with dementia in acute settings. Participants Twelve reports of nine studies were included for synthesis. Data extraction was conducted on each report by two researchers. Methods Framework synthesis was employed using VIPS framework, using Values, Individualised, Perspective and Social and psychological as concepts to guide synthesis. The VIPS framework has previously been used for exploring approaches to caring for people with dementia. Quality appraisal was conducted using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and NVivo facilitated sensitivity analysis to ensure confidence in the findings. Results Key themes, derived from VIPS, included a number of specific subthemes that examined: infrastructure and care pathways, person-centred approaches to care, how the person interacts with their environment and other patients, and family involvement in care decisions. The synthesis identified barriers to appropriate care for the person with dementia. These include ineffective pathways of care, unsuitable environments, inadequate resources and staffing levels and lack of emphasis on education and training for staff caring for people with dementia. Conclusions This review has identified key issues in the care of people with dementia in the acute setting: improving pathways of care, creating suitable environments, addressing resources and staffing levels and placing emphasis on the education for staff caring for people with dementia. Recommendations are made for practice consideration, policy development and future research. Leadership is required to instil the values needed to care for this client group in an effective and personcentred way. Qualitative evidence synthesis can inform policy and in this case, recommends VIPS as a suitable framework for guiding decisions around care for people with dementia in acute settings.