I’ve been discussing this with several colleagues, and they encouraged me to explore a safe discussion space where this can be dug into. Or allow constructive ranting and raging.
There are official feedback channels, but these have significant limitations. Also, many of us are quite isolated from face to face and (unrecorded) video meeting opportunities. There are powerful inhibitory incentives to sharing on official platforms.
So what could we do here to help this? There are a few special ways we could do this:
Anonymous Posting. A dedicated category which obscures the identity of the poster. Admins can identify people if needed.
An ephemoral Chat channel. Messages would evaporate after a set time (? 1 month).
There are a lot of negative and depressed feelings about the reset. I wonder that in order for it not become a whinge-fest or a rant or just depress people further that we consider how to have some positive outcomes for people, even if just support.
This sounds great. A place people know they can access support and resources, instead of another area to (understandably) give negative thoughts. We dont want people leaving feeling any worse than when they first logged on.
Hi Hemi
The Health NZ “What Say You” allows access to the Change Consultation and it is where feedback can be added. WSY
You need a Health NZ work email to register for the site. The site says Please email enablingconsultation@tewhatuora.govt.nz for change consultations or policyconsultation@tewhatuora.govt.nz for policy consultations to request access for a personal or non-work email so if you are outside of Health then use the email to find out if and how you can see the consultations.
I love that article! I bring it out now and then when I need a laugh about my work environment. It should be compulsory reading for everyone working in an organisation undergoing one redesign after another.
Some aspects of the consultation document are quite obtuse, and it’s hard to see those frontline impacts without having the domain knowledge of roles and scope involved.
It might be helpful for frontline staff who would like to advocate for HealthIT to have a bit of guidance regarding which parts of the consultation most specifically make changes obviously deleterious to clinical systems.
(I suspect it is … most parts … but having relevant critiques for each part might be helpful)
It’s not a 47% reduction in Data & Digital staff - it’s a 47% reduction in FTE roles and this includes 467 unfilled vacancies. Still grim, but accuracy is important.
Suffice to say with all the ‘permanent’ staff in the team I work in ‘significantly’ affected and contractors facing rate cuts, capped hours and reduced contract lengths (if fortunate? enough to be offered extensions); please don’t expect any positivity from me.
All I can say is what are they thinking? The major hope of improved efficiency was through improved tech and connectivity. Getting improvement in any system, esp the home grown one I have been involved in has been difficult in TWA but will now be impossible. I only hope that the clinical leaders in the system will be speaking truth up the reporting lines.
@NathanK I wish to remain anonymous as a HNZ kaimahi. Due to the challenging situation and career prospect, is it possible for me to added into the anonymous group to provide feedbacks.
No problem; the way that HNZ Reset (Anon) works is that anyone who is a trusted member of the eHealth Forum can read and post there anonymously.
To earn that trust, you need to engage with the site and the people in it genuinely, or have signed up with a trusted email domain (such as one of the Health New Zealand - Te Whatu Ora ones.)
If you already have an established account on the eHealth Forum, I’d recommend that you use it to post there; the anonymysation occurs automatically.
For those of you who have not heard, on Friday it was announced that the consultation period for the Digital Service proposed restructure has now been extended to 31 January 2025.
This is correct; however, the only way to re-identify people in HNZ Reset (Anon) would be for an admin (currently just me) to go specifically looking in the database. I would only do this if absolutely necessary (e.g. an illegal and/or dangerous act that can’t be simply dealt with by deletion) or if ordered to by a court.
Deprecation of the Ephemeral Channel
This wasn’t utilised, so I’ve turned it off just now.