All good IT designers are advocates of strong disciplined integrity of data when faced with multiple system developments or integrating systems.  However, can they really be the ones to blame for data going “Rotten”?  Basically no!

In every organisation we have worked with (and there have been quite a few of those) there have always been information quality issues and these tend to result from:

1. lack of or no maintenance processes being in place
2. multiple systems all trying to record the same information
3. badly trained users
4. human error.

The last of these will always occur no matter how well a system is designed and maintained however a combination of some or all of these failings slowly leads to both information analysts and decision makers losing faith in the quality of data.  It is at this point of low confidence that the then ‘twin devils’ called Microsoft Access and Microsoft Excel seize their opportunity to pour petrol on the flames.  Oh yes I hear you shout, as we’ve all been there.

The beauty of Microsoft application is that with relatively little experience you can quickly create short term solutions to problems.  However, before you know it the copy of data created to produce a management report becomes a master data source and a new ‘cottage’ industry is created in keeping the data current and trying to keep it reconciled with the data’s original source.  Within months, if not weeks, this new data source becomes more accurate than your core systems and Corporate Risk goes through the roof as you realise only one person knows how to maintain it.  Meanwhile your core applications get more and more out of date as copies of the copies of the copies proliferate.

There is nothing wrong with Access or Excel however organisations have to be disciplined in enforcing ‘master and servant’ rules.  That is, there is only one core data source and everything else should feed from that.  If the source data is rotten then fix it and then fix what made it rotten in the first place.  By trying to work around it the problem will only get bigger and the cost to fix larger.

Bodies such as CQC, NHSLA, Resuscitation Council to name but a few set many standards for learning and the outcome is a massive mandatory learning requirement across the NHS with many Trusts struggling to achieve even the minimum requirements. But why is it the case given the history of learning and the investments made?

In our opinion, the root of the problem often lies in the poor infrastructure surrounding NHS learning. In general we experience:

1. Learning information systems poorly designed or inadequately understood by those administering
2. Learning managed by clinical experts focussed on technical content only
3. Lack of clout to make change happen in learning units
4. Trainers with different substantive posts treating learning delivery as a favour to the organisation
5. NHS staff not treating learning as their own personal responsibility and viewing it as a distraction.

The impact of these problems is obvious but often not appreciated within the NHS:

1. Mandatory learning not achieved with significant deficiencies in some front line services
2. Exposure to risk for service users and the organisation
3. Escalating costs and little value for money
4. Low morale in learning units creating inertia
5. Lack of personal responsibility
6. Inability to share services.

Your most expensive resource is your workforce. This is often supported by an HR function that is shackled by an increasing administration burden.

Employee self service is simply a way of implementing a solution that allows data capture at source by the source. It will reduce your costs by eliminating duplication of data entry, dramatically reduce processing errors and increase the quality and timeliness of management information.

With the increasing cuts in financial budgets, local authorities can no longer afford the costs and limitations of labour intensive manual HR systems and processes that contribute little or no value.

From our experience of working with the Public Sector, there are several areas that need careful management to ensure that employee self service is successfully implemented and accepted by staff and managers alike:

•   Managing the technology supplier
•   Organisation cultural changes
•   Implementation approach
•   Lessons learned from others
•   Service Centre.

The key to success is understanding what you want to achieve, how you will achieve it and then sticking to your targets despite the barriers that will be placed in the way of progress.