Search

Previous studies of service reconfiguration in healthcare have explored the influence of power on processes and outcomes. However, in these accounts the moral agency of managers is often underemphasised. This paper draws on the theoretical tools provided by the sociology of morality to help deepen understanding of the interaction between power and moral agency in service reconfiguration in healthcare. It presents results from a qualitative study of a pan-organisational service reconfiguration in the NHS in England, involving nineteen in-depth interviews with those leading the change and the analysis of twelve programme documents. We combine concepts of the moral background and epistemic governance to interpret participants' conviction that the service change was 'the right thing to do'. The paper shows how epistemic work carried out by service change regulations shaped the moral background within which participants worked. This, in turn, channelled their moral agency – specifically their commitment to patient care – in a way that also reflected central priorities. The paper adds to sociological understandings of service reconfiguration through considering the interaction of structure, agency and power, while also developing the concept of the moral background to show how power relations can influence moral beliefs. • Managers can show strong faith in uncertain evidence for healthcare service change. • The moral background explains this in a way which considers power and moral agency. • Confidence in evidence depends on background assumption of future as predictable. • Confidence also depends on premise that finances are not open to moral evaluation. • Service change regulations carry out epistemic work on background assumptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An endemic challenge facing healthcare systems around the world is how to spread innovation more widely and sustainably. A common response to this challenge involves conducting pilot implementation studies to generate evidence of the innovation's benefits. However, despite the key role that such studies play in the local adoption of innovation, their contribution to the wider spread and sustainability of innovation is relatively under-researched and under-theorized. In this paper we examine this contribution through an empirical examination of the experiences of an innovation intermediary organization in the English NHS (National Health Service). We find that their work in mobilizing pilot-based evidence involves three main strands; configuring to context; transitioning evidence; and managing the transition. Through this analysis we contribute to theory by showing how the agency afforded by intermediary roles can support the effective transitioning of pilot-based evidence across different phases in the innovation journey, and across different occupational groups, and can thus help to create a positive feedback loop from localized early implementers of an innovation to later more widespread adoption and sustainability. Based on these findings, we develop insights on the reasons for the unnecessary repetition of pilots – so-called 'pilotitis'- and offer policy recommendations on how to enhance the role of pilots in the wider spread and sustainability of innovation. • Innovation intermediaries mobilize evidence from pilot studies to spread innovation. • Pilot-based evidence can link early adoption to wider spread and sustainability. • Mobilizing involves co-creating multiple forms of evidence with different groups. • Intermediary roles allow transitioning of pilot-based evidence into wider adoption. • Pilotitis involves a failure to transition evidence along the innovation journey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]