Purpose Maintaining user-focused integrated team working in complex care is one of the demands made of UK health and social care (H&SC) organisations who need employees that are resilient, resilience being the ability to persevere and thrive in the face of exposure to adverse situations (Rogerson and Ermes, 2008, p. 1). Grant and Kinman (2012) write that resilience is a complex and multi-dimensional construct that is underexplored in social care team work. The purpose of this paper is to capture the views of managers in H&SC to explore the making of resilient teams, identify factors that influence team performance and inform organisational workforce development strategy. Design/methodology/approach A general inductive approach (Silverman, 2011) was applied. Five focus groups were facilitated (n=40) each with eight participants all of whom were leaders and managers of teams in H&SC, working in the integrated care context in the UK. Findings Findings indicate that further investment in strategies and resources to sustain and educate employees who work in teams and further research into how organisational systems can facilitate this learning positively may contribute to resilient teams and performance improvement. The authors note specifically that H&SC organisations make a distinction between the two most prevalent team types and structures of multi-disciplinary and inter-professional and plan more targeted workforce development for individual and team learning for resiliency within these team structures. In doing so organisations may gain further advantages such as improved team performance in problematic care situations. Research limitations/implications Data captured are self-reported perceptions of H&SC managers. Participant responses in the focus group situation may have been those expected rather than those actually modelled in the realities of team work practice (Tanggaard, 2008). Further, in the sample all participants were engaged in a higher education programme and it is possible participants may have been more engaged with their practice and thinking more critically about the research questions than those not currently undertaking postgraduate study (Ng et al., 2014). Nor were the researchers able to observe the participants in team work practice over time or during critical care delivery incidents. Practical implications The preliminary link made here between multi-disciplinary and inter-professional team type, and their different stress points and subsequent workforce intervention, contributes to the theory of resilient teams. This provides organisations with a foundation for the focus of workplace learning and training around resilience. H&SC practitioner views presented offer a greater understanding of team work processes, together with a target for planning workforce development strategy to sustain resilience in team working. Originality/value This preliminary research found that participants in H&SC valued the team as a very important vehicle for building and sustaining resilience when dealing with complex H&SC situations. The capitalisation on the distinction in team type and individual working practices between those of interprofessional and multidisciplinary teams and the model of team learning, may have important consequences for building resilience in H&SC teams. These findings may be significant for workforce educators seeking to develop and build effective practice tools to sustain team working.

This study compares the actual experiences of patient representatives, with government legislation and policy on patient and public involvement (as outlined in the Health and Social Care Act 2001, and the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007). The research was time-limited and small-scale and comprised a focus group, six formal and two informal interviews with cardiac patients who had completed the British Heart Foundation (BHF) Hearty Voices training. One of the most prominent findings of the study was that patients who had a varied role and were at a more strategic level in representation reported feeling most rewarded in their efforts.

Transformation in the structure and delivery of services for children and young people in the UK Children Act (Department for Education & Skills, 2004. The Children Act. London: HMSO) initiated new alliances between statutory, public and voluntary agencies. Traditional relationships and notions of partnership have been extended, necessitating an innovative approach to dialogue and multiple perspectives. Hudson's assertion that although the "rhetoric on partnering remains strong, the real policy thrust is now about choice and contestability" (2006, Journal of Integrated Care, 14(1), 13-21) exemplifies the dynamic policy context around notions of partnership and the rationale for collaborative advantage. This paper explores the experiences of practitioners working in a relatively new multi-agency context--the common assessment framework (CAF). Envisaged as a standardized approach to the assessment of need and as a tool to facilitate integrated working, the CAF is utilized by practitioners in the UK to improve outcomes for children and young people. We present data from a study that employed an interpretative phenomenological analysis approach and gathered semi-structured interviews with 20 practitioners. Interviews drew upon their experiences of interprofessional working in which diversity, partnership working, and competing aims and objectives emerged as significant themes. The insights that were gained are discussed in terms of their potential impact on service delivery in the UK and their contribution toward responsive practice across dynamic professional boundaries.

One of the key challenges for practitioners in present day health and social care has been responding effectively in the interprofessional teamwork setting, where collaboration is at the centre of professional activity. For whilst practitioners are expected to work interprofessionally there often remains limited attention to the actual process of interprofessional practice itself, within organizational strategy, local workforce development planning and individual continuing professional development. These concerns were a driver for this research with practitioners in the field of learning disability which resulted in the development of a conceptual framework for interprofessional practice. This paper sets out the process of conceptual framework development, underpinned by the concepts of knowledge of learning disabilities, contextual socialisation, empowerment, conflict management, transforming capability and interprofessional reflection on action. The researcher suggests that the framework may offer clinical leaders in learning disabilities and a range of other practice settings a tool to facilitate individual practitioner development, enabling as it does, the identification of a range of critical factors which impact on the outcomes of interprofessional practice intervention.

This article asks what makes PhD completers resilient and which resilience protection factors help them complete their doctoral programme? A narrative inquiry methodology is applied to capture the experiences of eleven doctoral students who completed their PhDs in the United Kingdom. Data collected from interview conversations were analysed using resilience theory as a lens. We found that for these completers, success did not rely solely on the individual student, nor was the role of supervisors elevated, particularly for social and emotional support. Of importance was the students' family and social network, institutional context and the nature of university central services and how these were available to the completers. The study's contribution to the literature is in showing how the alignment of the completers' personal responses, environmental and social connections and institutional processes was available to build resilience, as we present a model for resilience protection in doctoral students .We hope the findings presented will be of interest to PhD students, supervisors and other academic colleagues in universities globally, as they seek insights into successful PhD completion.