Application of the AIM Methodology Transforms Performance at New South Wales Health, Australia

Situation

New South Wales (NSW) Health is responsible for ensuring that the people of New South Wales, Australia are provided with the best possible health care. The Department monitors the performance of the public health system, while area organisations plan, deliver and coordinate local health services, including public and community health, public hospitals, psychiatric hospitals, etc.

NSW Health had a large number of projects underway aimed at improving the patient experience and streamlining handover processes between NSW Health and community-based service providers. Daniel Comerford had a state-wide role as the Project Director for Redesign within Mental Health Services, and was directly involved in the implementation of a range of solutions which had been designed by personnel across eight Area Health Services.

External consultants had been engaged to help identify current issues and substantial effort was invested in designing more than 50 solution options. Staff from both NSW Health’s Performance Improvement Branch, which was driving the Clinical Services Re-design Program, and staff from the Mental Health and Drug and Alcohol Office formed a joint governance committee overseeing the implementation. 6-8 of the options were scheduled for implementation during August to November 2006.

Comerford became worried when he realized that no real implementation progress had been made. He asked for status updates on a regular basis, but he received no feedback. He concluded toward the end of the year, after a series of attempts to revitalize the project, that the projects had stagnated, or even died a premature death.

IMA's Role

In February 2007 Comerford attended a 2-day introduction to IMA’s Accelerating Implementation Methodology (AIM). During the 2-day course he discovered that the key challenge hindering project success was the lack of effective sponsorship. Comerford realized that sponsorship had to be cascaded from the top all the way down to where the project directly impacted staff. Also, he recognized that he hadn’t provided his sponsors with clear directions for exactly what they had to do to make this happen.

Comerford used the approaches and tactics he had learned to identify key stakeholders in the organisation and developed a plan to fill the ‘black holes’ caused by ineffective sponsorship.

3 weeks after executing his sponsorship plan the project was promptly back on track, delivering significant business benefits. Clear accountability and responsibilities for the delivery of the identified project had been articulated. Each Area Health Service had re-defined the expected outcomes and who was responsible for project progression, implementation and reporting.