Restorative Just Culture in Practice
Implementation and Evaluation
Sidney Dekker, Amanda Oates, Joseph Rafferty, Sidney Dekker, Amanda Oates, Joseph Rafferty
- 288 pagine
- English
- ePUB (disponibile sull'app)
- Disponibile su iOS e Android
Restorative Just Culture in Practice
Implementation and Evaluation
Sidney Dekker, Amanda Oates, Joseph Rafferty, Sidney Dekker, Amanda Oates, Joseph Rafferty
Informazioni sul libro
A restorative just culture has become a core aspiration for many organizations in healthcare and elsewhere. Whereas 'just culture' is the topic of some residual conceptual debate (e.g. retributive policies organized around rules, violations and consequences are 'sold' as just culture), the evidence base on, and business case for, restorative practice has been growing and is generating increasing, global interest. In the wake of an incident, restorative practices ask who are impacted, what their needs are and whose obligation it is to meet those needs. Restorative practices aim to involve participants from the entire community in the resolution and repair of harms.
This book offers organization leaders and stakeholders a practical guide to the experiences of implementing
and evaluating restorative practices and creating a sustainable just, restorative culture. It contains the perspectives from leaders, theoreticians regulators, employees and patient representatives. To the best of our knowledge, there is no book on the market today that can function as a guide for the implementation and evaluation of a just and learning culture and restorative practices. This book is intended to fill this gap. This book will provide, among other topics, an overview of restorative just culture principles and practices; a balanced treatment of the various implementations and evaluations of just culture and restorative processes; a guide for leaders about what to stop, start, increase and decrease in their own organizations; and an attentive to philosophical and historical traditions and assumptions that underlie just culture and restorative approaches.
The interest in 'just culture', not just in healthcare but also in other fields of safety-critical practice, has been steadily growing over the past decade. It is a trending area. In this, it has become clear that 20-year-old retributive models not only hinder the acceleration of performance and organizational improvement but have also in some cases become a blunt HR instrument, an expression of power over justice and a way to stifle honesty, reporting and learning. What is new in this, then, is the restorative angle on just culture, as it has been developed over the last few years and now is practised and applied to HR, suicide prevention, healthcareimprovement, regulatory innovations and other areas.
Domande frequenti
Informazioni
Chapter 1 Introduction to Restorative Just Culture
The Retributive Dead End
- What rule was broken?
- Who is responsible?
- How bad is the violation (honest mistake, at-risk or reckless behavior) and so what should the consequences be?
Restorative Just Culture as a Strong Alternative
- An event causes harm, and the response to that event should aim to repair that harm. This includes taking responsibility for the harm and making amends for it.
- The people most involved in, and affected by, the harm should all be able to participate in designing and deciding the restoration needed.
- The result often includes restoration of trust and a transformation of relationships between stakeholders and reintegrates participants into the community of practice.
- Who is impacted?
- What do they need?
- Whose obligation is it to meet those needs?
- Address the harm done to first and second victims of the incident, as well as the surrounding community.
- Address the systemic issues that helped produce the incident by asking what was responsible for it, so that other practitioners and first victims are less likely to end up in a similar situation.
- Encounters between stakeholders. The first one is likely to be between your organization and the practitioner(s) involved in the incident. Remember your organization’s obligations above!
- An encounter between the first and the second victim, appropriately guided, may follow. Surrogates or representatives may need to be used in some situations.
- Encouraging all stakeholders to give their accounts, ask questions, express feelings and work toward a mutually acceptable solution.
- Acknowledge the harm, restore the balance and address your future intentions.
- Getting people from the community of practice involved. These are most likely the people who understand intimately the messy details of how work is done and how success and failure are created locally. Without a deeper understanding of how success is normally assured, and how a negative event could come about, there is neither a good chance of a fair response to it nor a good chance of finding entry points for change and improvement.
- Engaging in forward-looking accountability. Forward-looking accountability deals with causes and consequences because it directs accountabilities toward prevention. It holds people accountable not by fixing blame for something past. Rather, people collaboratively fix future responsibilities for things they need to accomplish in and for the community.
- Involvement of those who will have to do the work enhances the legitimacy of the rules that apply to people’s work.
- Taking part in the process of developing the rules increases the sense of ownership the workers feel toward the rules. The rules derive from their own insights, arguments and experiences.
- Developing the rules in connection with the workers ensures that the rules are connected with reality. The standards are not designed for an ideal environment, imagined without time pressures, complicating factors and conflicting information. Instead, the written rules (and practices taught by educators) align with and support normal practice in the field.