How did whistleblowing and the duty of candour get onto the agenda of the British national health service

Abstract

Purpose

This paper compares how the two interacting themes of “Whistleblowing” or “Speaking Up” and the duty of candour (DoC), which are both concerned with safety and quality improvement in health care, got onto the agenda of the British National Health Service (NHS).

Design/methodology/approach

It uses the approach of multiple streams and the methodology of interpretive content analysis in a deductive approach that focusses on both manifest and latent content. It examines official documents that discuss the DoC or whistleblowing or cognate terms in connection with the British NHS from 1999 to 2019.

Findings

The main conceptual finding, which mirrors many previous studies, is that it seems difficult to operationalise many of the sub-components of the multiple streams approach. The main empirical finding points to the “focusing event” of the Francis Report into the Mid Staffordshire Trust of 2013 and the importance of its Chair, Sir Robert Francis, as a policy entrepreneur.

Originality/value

This is one of the first studies to focus on both issues of whistleblowing and the DoC and the first to compare them through the lens of the multiple streams approach. It has two main conceptual advantages over most previous studies in the field: it compares whistleblowing and the duty of candour rather than the dominant approach of a single case study and explores the different outcomes of failed as well as successful couplings of the streams.

Citation

Powell, M. (2024), "How did whistleblowing and the duty of candour get onto the agenda of the British national health service", Journal of Health Organization and Management, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 583-599. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-07-2023-0217