Browsing by Author "Orgill, Marsha"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Mapping the existing body of health policy implementation research in lower income settings: what is covered and what are the gaps?
    (Oxford University Press (OUP), 2014) Erasmus, Ermin; Orgill, Marsha; Schneider, Helen; Gilson, Lucy
    This article uses 85 peer-reviewed articles published between 1994 and 2009 to characterize and synthesize aspects of the health policy analysis literature focusing on policy implementation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It seeks to contribute, first, to strengthening the field of LMIC health policy analysis by highlighting gaps in the literature and generating ideas for a future research agenda and, second, to thinking about the value and applicability of qualitative synthesis approaches to the health policy analysis field. Overall, the article considers the disciplinary perspectives from which LMIC health policy implementation is studied and the extent to which the focus is on systems or programme issues. It then works with the more specific themes of the key thrusts of the reviewed articles, the implementation outcomes studied, implementation improvement recommendations made and the theories used in the reviewed articles. With respect to these more specific themes, the article includes explorations of patterns within the themes themselves, the contributions of specific disciplinary perspectives and differences between systems and programme articles. It concludes, among other things, that the literature remains small, fragmented, of limited depth and quite diverse, reflecting a wide spectrum of health system dimensions studied and many different suggestions for improving policy implementation. However, a range of issues beyond traditional ‘hardware’ health system concerns, such as funding and organizational structure, are understood to influence policy implementation, including many ‘software’ issues such as the understandings of policy actors and the need for better communication and actor relationships. Looking to the future, there is a need, given the fragmentation in the literature, to consolidate the existing body of work where possible and, given the often broad nature of the work and its limited depth, to draw more explicitly on theoretical frames and concepts to deepen work by sharpening and focusing concerns and questions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The multiple lenses on the community health system: Implications for policy, practice and research
    (2021-07) Schneider, Helen; Olivier, Jill; Orgill, Marsha
    Community health systems (CHSs) have historically been approached from multiple perspectives, with different purposes and methodological and disciplinary orientations. The terrain is, on the one hand, vast and diverse. On the other hand, under the banner of universal health coverage (UHC) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a streamlined version of ‘community health’ is increasingly being consolidated in global health and donor communities. With the view to informing debate and practice, this paper seeks to synthesise approaches to the CHS into a set of ‘lenses,’ drawing on the collective and multi-disciplinary knowledge (both formal and experiential) of the authors, a collaborative network of 23 researchers from seven institutions across six countries (spanning low, middle and high income). With a common view of the CHS as a complex adaptive system, we propose four key lenses, referred to as programmatic, relational, collective action and critical lenses. The lenses represent different positionalities in community health, encompassing macro-level policy-maker, front-line and community vantage points, and purposes ranging from social justice to instrumental goals. We define and describe the main elements of each lens and their implications for thinking about policy, practice and research. Distilling a set of key lenses offers a way to make sense of a complex terrain, but also counters what may emerge as a dominant, single narrative on the CHS in global health. By making explicit and bringing together different lenses on the CHS, the limits and possibilities of each may be better appreciated, while promoting integrative, systems thinking in policy, practice and research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Practice and power: a review and interpretive synthesis focused on the exercise of discretionary power in policy implementation by front line providers and managers
    (Oxford University Press, 2014) Gilson, Lucy; Orgill, Marsha; Schneider, Helen
    Tackling the implementation gap is a health policy concern in low- and middleincome countries (LMICs). Limited attention has so far been paid to the influence of power relations over this gap. This article presents, therefore, an interpretive synthesis of qualitative health policy articles addressing the question: how do actors at the front line of health policy implementation exercise discretionary power, with what consequences and why? The article also demonstrates the particular approach of thematic synthesis and contributes to discussion of how such work can inform future health policy research. The synthesis drew from a broader review of published research on any aspect of policy implementation in LMICs for the period 1994–2009. From an initial set of 50 articles identified as relevant to the specific review question, a sample of 16 articles were included in this review. Nine report experience around decentralization, a system-level change, and seven present experience of implementing a range of reproductive health (RH) policies (new forms of service delivery). Three reviewers were involved in a systematic process of data extraction, coding, analysis, synthesis and article writing. The review findings identify: the practices of power exercised by front-line health workers and their managers; their consequences for policy implementation and health system performance; the sources of this power and health workers’ reasons for exercising power. These findings also provide the basis for an overarching synthesis of experience, highlighting the importance of actors, power relations and multiple, embedded contextual elements as dimensions of health system complexity. The significance of this synthesis lies in its insights about: the micropractices of power exercised by front-line providers; how to manage this power through local level strategies both to influence and empower providers to act in support of policy goals; and the focus and nature of future research on these issues.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Whole-system change: case study of factors facilitating early implementation of a primary health care reform in a South African province
    (BioMed Central, 2014) Schneider, Helen; English, Rene; Tabana, Hanani; Padayachee, Thesandree; Orgill, Marsha
    BACKGROUND: Whole-system interventions are those that entail system wide changes in goals, service delivery arrangements and relationships between actors, requiring approaches to implementation that go beyond projects or programmes. METHODS: Drawing on concepts from complexity theory, this paper describes the catalysts to implementation of a whole-system intervention in the North West Province of South Africa. This province was an early adopter of a national primary health care (PHC) strategy that included the establishment of PHC outreach teams based on generalist community health workers. We interviewed a cross section of provincial actors, from senior to frontline, observed processes and reviewed secondary data, to construct a descriptive-explanatory case study of early implementation of the PHC outreach team strategy and the factors facilitating this in the province. RESULTS: Implementation of the PHC outreach team strategy was characterised by the following features: 1) A favourable provincial context of a well established district and sub-district health system and long standing values in support of PHC; 2) The forging of a collective vision for the new strategy that built on prior history and values and that led to distributed leadership and ownership of the new policy; 3) An implementation strategy that ensured alignment of systems (information, human resources) and appropriate sequencing of activities (planning, training, piloting, household campaigns); 4) The privileging of ‘community dialogues’ and local manager participation in the early phases; 5) The establishment of special implementation structures: a PHC Task Team (chaired by a senior provincial manager) to enable feedback and ensure accountability, and an NGO partnership that provided flexible support for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: These features resonate with the deliberative, multi-level and context sensitive approaches described as the “simple rules” of successful PHC system change in other settings. Although implementation was not without tensions and weaknesses, particularly at the front-line of the PHC system, the case study highlights how a collective vision can facilitate commitment to and engagement with new policy in complex organisational environments. Successful adoption does not, however, guarantee sustained implementation at scale, and we consider the challenges to further information.