Abstract
AbstractThis commentary focuses on “intangible software”, defined as the range of ideas, norms, values and issues of power or trust that affect the performance of health systems. While the need to work with intangible software within health systems is increasingly being recognized, the practical hows of doing so have been given less attention. In this commentary, we, a team of researchers and implementers from India, have tried to deliberate on these hows through a practice lens. We engage with four questions of current relevance to intangible software in the field of health policy and systems research (HPSR): (1) Is it possible to rewire intangible software in health systems? (2) What approaches have been attempted in the Indian public health system to rewire intangibles? (3) Have such approaches been evaluated? (4) What practical lessons can we offer from our experience on rewiring intangibles? From our perspective, approaches to rewiring intangible software recognize that people in health systems are capable of visioning, thinking, adapting to and leading change. These approaches attempt to challenge the often-unchallenged power hierarchies in health systems by allowing people to engage deeply with widely accepted norms and routinized actions. In this commentary, we have reported on such approaches from India under six categories: approaches intended to enable visioning and leading; approaches targeted at engaging with evidence better; approaches intended to help health workers navigate contextual complexities; approaches intended to build the cultural competence; approaches that recognize and reward performance; and approaches targeted at enabling collaborative work and breaking power hierarchies. Our collective experiences suggest that intangible software interventions work best when they are codesigned with various stakeholders, are contextually adapted in an iterative manner and are implemented in conjunction with structural improvements. Also, such interventions require long-term investments. Based on our experiences, we highlight the need for the following: (1) fostering more dialogue on this category of interventions among all stakeholders for cross-learning; (2) evaluating and publishing evidence on such interventions in nonconventional ways, with a focus on participatory learning; and (3) building ecosystems that allow experiential learnings on such interventions to be shared.
Funder
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference38 articles.
1. Gilson L, Hanson K, Sheikh K, et al. Building the field of health policy and systems research: social science matters. PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1001079.
2. AHPSR. What is health policy and systems research (HPSR)? Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019.
3. Ellokor S, Olckers P, Gilson L et al. Crises, routines and innovations—the complexities and possibilities of sub-district management. in South African Health Review 2012/3, Health Systems Trust, Durban, 2013; pp. 161–73.
4. Sheikh K, Gilson L, Agyepong IA, Hanson K, Ssengooba F, Bennett S. Building the field of health policy and systems research: framing the questions. PLoS Med. 2011;8(8):e1001073.
5. Guinaran RC, Alupias EB, Gilson L. The practice of power by regional managers in the implementation of an indigenous people’s health policy in the Philippines. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021. https://doi.org/10.34172/IJHPM.2020.246.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献