Public service commissioning: origins, influences, and characteristics

Sturgess, Gary

doi:10.1080/25741292.2018.1473100

Cited by 16 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The origins of contemporary application of commissioning can be traced back to the United Kingdom in the 1980s and 1990s, when attempts were made to address fragmentation and poor coordination between health and social care authorities (Sturgess 2018). Commissioning has subsequently been recognized as a vital tool in the New Public Management arsenal (Boston 1996;Hood 1991Hood , 1995.…”

Section: Key Features Of Effective Commissioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving commissioning through design thinking

Mintrom

Thomas

2018

Policy Design and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public policies and programs are intended to improve the lives of citizens. Considerable efforts are currently being made to utilize evidence, conduct experiments, and use program monitoring to increase the likelihood that policies and programs will generate intended effects. We explore the neglected connection between design thinking and commissioning of public services and make a general argument for how design thinking can contribute to more effective commissioning. We use the case of charter schooling to show how acquiring and sharing knowledge of local contexts can improve service design and delivery. We conclude that paying greater attention to local collaboration and service enhancement through the application of design thinking can improve commissioning and contribute significantly to the pursuit of desired social and economic outcomes. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Key Features Of Effective Commissioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving commissioning through design thinking

Mintrom

Thomas

2018

Policy Design and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include needs assessment, procurement, purchasing, contracting, service delivery and performance management, all of which are interrelated yet disinct processes (Dickinson, , 15). Sturgess (, 165) expresses commissioning's primary function as: ‘to design and manage the interface between policy/funding and delivery’. Tasked with improving the efficiency, effectiveness and coordination of services, commissioning organisations, such as PHNs, act as intermediaries between policymakers/funders and service providers.…”

Section: Commissioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tasked with improving the efficiency, effectiveness and coordination of services, commissioning organisations, such as PHNs, act as intermediaries between policymakers/funders and service providers. Commissioners are responsible for the strategic design and ‘stewardship’ of service‐provision systems (Sturgess, , 163), gearing their overall functioning towards the efficient achievement of government's strategic objectives. In theory , commissioning improves on previous attempts to improve the purchaser‐provider relationship because it acknowledges some of the complexities encountered at the service delivery coalface (Sturgess, , 156).…”

Section: Commissioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commissioners are responsible for the strategic design and ‘stewardship’ of service‐provision systems (Sturgess, , 163), gearing their overall functioning towards the efficient achievement of government's strategic objectives. In theory , commissioning improves on previous attempts to improve the purchaser‐provider relationship because it acknowledges some of the complexities encountered at the service delivery coalface (Sturgess, , 156). However, as Dickinson notes (), commissioning's definitional ‘fuzziness’ has meant that in practice the concept has been used ‘as a synonym for more contracting out or privatisation’.…”

Section: Commissioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Robinson and colleagues (, 10) have argued that the crux of the commissioning task is to accommodate multiple and sometimes divergent values, goals, and practices. In this way, successful commissioners are those who achieve ‘a meeting of the minds’ amongst diverse stakeholders (Sturgess, , 164). Booth and Boxall (, 3–4) contend that fostering reciprocal and trusting relationships between commissioners (e.g.…”

Section: Commissioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Primary Health Networks’ impact on Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services

Coombs

2018

Aust J Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Governance of patient‐centred care: A systemic approach to cancer treatment

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, policymaking in cancer treatment is based on a reductionist approach and does not consider the differing views of multiple stakeholders in a systemic fashion. Non‐integrated views are not representative of the totality of the real‐life treatment context, and policymakers need to capture that holistic representation in their decision making. This paper uses a ‘systems thinking’ approach to propose a holistic way of capturing different stakeholders' views and integrating these into optimal treatment. Key stakeholders operate within their own system, as well as within the overarching complex system of cancer treatment care. An integrated view will enable policymakers to better understand the various issues involved and invoke a more holistic governance approach that encourages greater integration and emergence. Subject matter experts in Australia were consulted to provide narratives that were used to construct individual systemic views (systemigrams) to represent the constructivist perspectives of two key stakeholder groups: patients and oncology nurses. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted to validate the representativeness of the systemigrams created. The systemigrams that captured the perceptions and objectives of patients and nurses were found to be significantly different from each other. Understanding that individual views are only a part of the complex system can lead to a better appreciation of failures within cancer treatment and how to address these through optimal governance. Dynamic integration of differing perspectives in the cancer treatment journey is important. Recognizing and encouraging emergent behaviour among key stakeholders will enable effective governance. Management in cancer care is currently largely undertaken through individual silos with little interaction between those silos. This paper presents a new way of visualizing and conceptualizing governance of cancer treatment that will make governance more holistic and will improve patient‐centred care.

show abstract

Public service commissioning: origins, influences, and characteristics

Cited by 16 publications

References 17 publications

Improving commissioning through design thinking

Improving commissioning through design thinking

Primary Health Networks’ impact on Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services

Governance of patient‐centred care: A systemic approach to cancer treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About