Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore and describe the perspectives and reasoning of senior development leaders in healthcare organizations, when reflecting on design as theory and practice in relation to more traditional methods and tools for improving quality and support innovation.

The paper is based on a qualitative interview design with five development and innovation leaders from separate healthcare regions in Sweden. They have, to varying degrees, applied design theory and practice for quality improvement and innovation in their organizations. The interview transcript was analysed using a content analysis together with an interpretive approach.

The major findings are to be found in the balancing act for leadership and organizations in healthcare when it comes to introducing and combining different theories and practices for improving quality and support innovation. The balance is between the change in power dynamics and pushing traditional boundaries in a complex healthcare world.

The narratives from the leaders' experience of applying design theory and practice for improving healthcare quality can help us create readiness and knowledge about how we prevent and/or facilitate planning and implementing design theories, practices, methods and tools in a healthcare context.

The study provides a unique insight when it captures and illustrates five different organizations' experiences when applying design for developing healthcare quality.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute knowledge concerning the dynamics and potential cultural tensions that occur when applying user involvement and design thinking (DT) for improving quality in a health-care setting.

This paper is based on a case study following a quality improvement (QI) project in a medium-sized Swedish county council in the field of somatic care. The project involved eight health-care professionals, one designer, four patients and two relatives. A multiple data collection method over a period of ten months was used. It included individual interviews, e-mail correspondence and observations of workshops that covered the QI project.

The result shows tensions between QI work and the daily clinical work of the participants. These tensions primarily concern the conflict between fast and slow processes, the problem of moving between different fields of knowledge, being a resource for the individual clinic and the system and the participants’ expectations and assumptions about roles and responsibilities in a QI project. Furthermore, these findings could be interpreted as signs of a development culture in the health-care context.

There are several practical implications. Among others, the insights can inspire how to approach and contextualize the current concepts, roles and methods of DT and user involvement so that they can be more easily understood and integrated into the existing culture and way of working in the health-care sector.

This study provides a unique insight into a case, trying to uncover what actually is going on and perhaps, why certain things are not happening at all, when user involvement and design practices are applied for improving health-care quality.