EMPLOYMENT
A simplified and more flexible Knowledge and Skills Framework has been published to support staff development in appraisals, to underpin high quality patient care. It aims to help organisations deliver on their commitment in the NHS Constitution to the training and development of every member of staff. Mary Mercer explains how best NHS organisations can implement the new guidance...
The revised KSF T
he NHS Knowledge and Skills Framework is the career and pay
progression strand of the NHS pay system for non–medical staff (part of the Agenda for Change).
The provisions relating to the NHS KSF are part of the national collective agreement and the expectation was that it would be fully implemented by all NHS organisations when it was launched in 2004.
However, the National Audit Office found in August/ September 2008 that 54% of staff had had a development review and the staff survey results for England in 2008 showed only 64% of staff were having appraisals. Therefore, at best, only two-thirds of non-medical staff were having performance and development reviews despite the best intentions of the KSF.
This was of particular concern as the KSF should support the delivery of high quality patient care through every member of staff:
• having a clear understanding of their role and the part they play in their team and organisation;
• having an agreed set of priorities and objectives for their work; and
Mary Mercer
• possessing and applying the knowledge and skills they need to perform that role effectively and to achieve their objectives.
Effective staff appraisal and development have been proven to contribute directly to improved patient outcomes and so for at least a third of staff to be missing out on these reviews was a significant concern.
In some organisations the KSF had been effectively implemented but many were clearly struggling and a few had abandoned it altogether. There were a number of issues with the KSF impeding wider implementation including:
• - devolvement of power in NHS
• - too detailed a system aimed at professional staff
• – a weak performance management culture and a lack of prior appraisal and development review experience
• - other priorities, such as reorganisation
When the Institute for Employment Studies came to review the KSF in 2009 we spoke to many health professionals. Some said abandon the KSF, others said insist on implementation with penalties for non-compliance. However many wanted to retain the principles of the KSF but wanted a streamlined process with implementation led from the heart with a real understanding of the benefits and purpose.
As a result the revised guidance highlights the relationship been appraisal and development and positive outcomes for patients and retains the principles of the KSF but also simplifies it and make more user friendly and workable. The aim is that organisations will want to use the KSF and this will prevent the wastefulness and inefficiency and inconsistency of every trust creating their own system from scratch.
The PADR process
At the heart of the revised guidance is the concept that all NHS staff, at least once a
18 nhe
year, should meet with their manager to have a performance appraisal and development review. This should form part of an ongoing relationship between the member of staff and their manager.
The guidance puts forward a performance appraisal and development review process (PADR) which organisations can choose to use or adapt as required to fit their needs. The PADR can be used alongside or incorporate other relevant frameworks, such as specific organisational values and behaviours.
The PADR process has two core parts:
• Performance appraisal - the process of agreeing personal objectives and how their achievement can be measured, and then assessing how staff perform against them, in the context of the organisation’s goals and values.
• Personal development planning and review (PDP/R) - the process of defining the types and levels of skills, knowledge and behaviour that staff require in carrying out their work, assessing their current skill levels against these requirements, and then putting development plans in place to close any gaps or shortfalls.
These parts should be fully integrated with each other, as illustrated below.
Implementation
Organisations can consider how they would like to implement the PADR process, but if support is
Nov/Dec 10
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100