Innovation in facilities management: from trajectories to ownership

Purpose – Innovation in facilities management (FM) is a complex process as FM is a diverse discipline. This paper aims to use innovation trajectories to explore this complex process through the introduction of a technology innovation in two FM services of security and workspace management. It also aims to consider the discourse of individuals within their trajectory to understand their positions toward the innovation. Design/methodology/approach – A two-year case study was conducted and it was based in an in-house FM department that was part of a financial institution. The specific methods used for the paper were semi-structured interviews with key participants of the project. Critical discourse analysis was used to examine the data. Findings – Individuals who were involved in introducing the technology to the FM department were both internal and external to FM as innovation in FM does not happen in isolation to the organisation. Innovation trajectories were often intertwined or occurred simultaneously during the process of a project which sometimes resulted in conflict. Tensions within the discourse of ownership of the project were particularly apparent as this discourse had a power dimension in driving the project through to implementation. Research limitations/implications – The research is limited by being a single case study so it is not possible to generalise findings but the findings may have resonances with other organisations. Originality/value – The paper presents an original idea about how to understand innovation processes in FM services.

Recurring themes in value management practice

This paper reports on a survey of 17 value management exercises recently carried out within the UK construction industry. Twelve leading value management practitioners were asked to describe an example of a value management study which ‘worked well’ and one which ‘did not work well’. They were further asked to explain the underlying factors which they considered had influenced the eventual outcome of the value management study. The subsequent analysis of the interview transcripts reveals six recurring themes which were held to have had a significant influence: expectations, implementation, participation, power, time constraint and uncertainty. Whilst caution is necessary in extracting the themes from their individual contexts, they do provide a valuable insight into the factors which influence the outcome of value management studies.

PINCER trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmacist-led IT-based intervention with simple feedback in reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices

Background: Medication errors in general practice are an important source of potentially preventable morbidity and mortality. Building on previous descriptive, qualitative and pilot work, we sought to investigate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and likely generalisability of a complex pharm acist-led IT-based intervention aiming to improve prescribing safety in general practice. Objectives: We sought to: • Test the hypothesis that a pharmacist-led IT-based complex intervention using educational outreach and practical support is more effective than simple feedback in reducing the proportion of patients at risk from errors in prescribing and medicines management in general practice. • Conduct an economic evaluation of the cost per error avoided, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS). • Analyse data recorded by pharmacists, summarising the proportions of patients judged to be at clinical risk, the actions recommended by pharmacists, and actions completed in the practices. • Explore the views and experiences of healthcare professionals and NHS managers concerning the intervention; investigate potential explanations for the observed effects, and inform decisions on the future roll-out of the pharmacist-led intervention • Examine secular trends in the outcome measures of interest allowing for informal comparison between trial practices and practices that did not participate in the trial contributing to the QRESEARCH database. Methods Two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial of 72 English general practices with embedded economic analysis and longitudinal descriptive and qualitative analysis. Informal comparison of the trial findings with a national descriptive study investigating secular trends undertaken using data from practices contributing to the QRESEARCH database. The main outcomes of interest were prescribing errors and medication monitoring errors at six- and 12-months following the intervention. Results: Participants in the pharmacist intervention arm practices were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID without a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) if they had a history of peptic ulcer (OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.38, 0.89), to have been prescribed a beta-blocker if they had asthma (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58, 0.91) or (in those aged 75 years and older) to have been prescribed an ACE inhibitor or diuretic without a measurement of urea and electrolytes in the last 15 months (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34, 0.78). The economic analysis suggests that the PINCER pharmacist intervention has 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker’s ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 (6 months) or £85 (12 months) per error avoided. The intervention addressed an issue that was important to professionals and their teams and was delivered in a way that was acceptable to practices with minimum disruption of normal work processes. Comparison of the trial findings with changes seen in QRESEARCH practices indicated that any reductions achieved in the simple feedback arm were likely, in the main, to have been related to secular trends rather than the intervention. Conclusions Compared with simple feedback, the pharmacist-led intervention resulted in reductions in proportions of patients at risk of prescribing and monitoring errors for the primary outcome measures and the composite secondary outcome measures at six-months and (with the exception of the NSAID/peptic ulcer outcome measure) 12-months post-intervention. The intervention is acceptable to pharmacists and practices, and is likely to be seen as costeffective by decision makers.