Professional

Part 2: Applying the cultural web – Changing the labour ward culture

Abstract

This is the second of two articles looking at cultural change in maternity services using Johnson's cultural web model (1992). Part one explored and explained the model in terms of the dominant cultural paradigm, and its analysis and potential for change (Freemantle, 2013). This article demonstrates the application of the cultural web model to maternity services and its potential impact on women-centred care—specifically labour ward culture. A cultural web is developed and summarised before using the model to consider change and identify a desired culture that aligns with the Chief Nursing Officer's (CNO) ‘6 Cs’ vision for nursing and midwifery care (Department of Health (DH), 2012), the Safer Childbirth report (Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) et al, 2007) and Maternity Matters (DH, 2007). For demonstration purposes, the change focus or problems are continued use of outdated, entrenched labour ward practices around the second stage of labour, which conflict with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2007) best practice guidance and may well diminish or deny the opportunity for normal birth (Williams, 2007). It recognises the fundamental part midwives and midwifery leadership plays in shaping and changing the culture of care, with particular reference to Supervisors of Midwives (SoM). Consequently, this model has the potential for widespread application throughout maternity services by improving efficiency, effectiveness and the environment of care.

References

Care Quality Commission (2010a) Women's experiences of maternity care in England: Key findings from the 2010 NHS trust survey. www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/20101201_mat10_briefing_final_for_publication_201101072550.pdf (accessed 6 September 2013) Google Scholar
Care Quality Commission (2010b) Guidance about compliance: Essential standards of quality and safety. Care Quality Commission, London Google Scholar
Cooke A (2010) When will we change practice and stop directing pushing in labour. British Journal of Midwifery 18(2): 76–81 Link, Google Scholar
Department of Health (2007) Maternity Matters: Choice, access and continuity of care in a safe service. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London Google Scholar
Department of Health (2009) Delivering high quality care: The priorities, opportunities and challenges for midwives. Department of Health, London Google Scholar
Department of Health, NHS Commissioning Board (2012) Compassion in Practice. Nursing, Midwifery and Care staff: Our Vision and Strategy. Department of Health, Leeds Google Scholar
Francis R (2013) Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Enquiry. Volume 1. The Stationery Office, London Google Scholar
Freemantle D (2013) Part 1: The cultural web – A model for change in maternity services. British Journal of Midwifery 21(9): 648–53 Link, Google Scholar
Greenhaigh T (2010) How to read a paper. The basics of evidence-based medicine (4^th edn.). Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Oxford Google Scholar
Handy C (1993) Understanding organizations – A new edition of this landmark study (4^th edn.) Penguin Business management, London Google Scholar
Heffernan M (2011) Wilful Blindness: Why we ignore the obvious at our peril. Simon & Schuster Ltd, London Google Scholar
Huczynski A, Buchanan D (2007) Organizational Behaviour: An introductory text (6^th edn.). Prentice Hall, London Google Scholar
Hunt S, Symonds A (1994) The social meaning of midwifery. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke Google Scholar
Johnson G (1992) Managing strategic change: Strategy, culture and action. Long Range Planning 25(1): 28–36 Crossref, Google Scholar
Johnson G, Scholes K (1997) Exploring corporate strategy: Text and cases (4^th edn.). Financial Times/Prentice Hall, London Google Scholar
Johnson G, Scholes K, Whittington R (2011) Exploring strategy: Text and cases (9^th edn.). Financial Times/Prentice Hall, London Google Scholar
Kirkham M (1999) The culture of midwifery in the National Health Service in England. Journal of Advanced Nursing 30(3): 732–9 Crossref, Google Scholar
Kirkham M (2010) Midwifery and medical models: Do they have to be opposites? The Practising Midwife 13(3): 14 Google Scholar
Kouzes J, Posner B (2012) The Leadership Challenge Journal: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations (5^th edn.). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, (2007) Intrapartum care: Management and delivery of care to women in labour. NICE Clinical Guideline 55. www.nice.org.uk/CG55 (accessed 6 September 2013) Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2008) The code: Standards of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives. Nursing and Midwifery Council, London Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2012) Midwives Rules and Standards 2012. Nursing and Midwifery Council, London Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of Anaesthetists, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (2007) Safer Childbirth: Minimum Standards for the Organisation and Delivery of Care in Labour. RCOG Press, London Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2013) RCOG Manifesto for Change – moving forward from the second Francis Inquiry. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London Google Scholar
Russell KE (2007) Mad, bad or different? Midwives and normal birth in obstetric led units. British Journal of Midwifery 15(3): 128–31 Link, Google Scholar
Schein EH (2010) Organizational culture and leadership (4^th edn.). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Google Scholar
Senge PM (1990) The leader's new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management Review 7: 23 Google Scholar
Sheridan V (2010) Organisational culture and routine midwifery practice on labour ward: Implications for mother-baby contact. Evidence-Based Midwifery 8(3): 76–84 Google Scholar
The King's Fund (2008) Safe Births: Everybody's business. An independent enquiry into the safety of maternity services in England. The King's Fund, London Google Scholar
The King's Fund (2012) Improving safety in maternity services. A toolkit for teams. The King's Fund, London Google Scholar
Williams C (2007) Arbitrary time limits for the second stage of labour – do they disempower women from achieving normal birth? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 17(4): 527–33 Google Scholar

1 October 2013Volume 21Issue 10

ISSN (print): 0969-4900
ISSN (online): 2052-4307

Metrics

History

Published online 30 September 2013

Published in print 1 October 2013

Information

Acknowledgements:

Thanks are due to the following group members who provided their time and efforts in developing the project assessment: Sonia Bannatyne, Lita Flood, Dawn Phillips and Merida Sculthorpe. The author would also like to thank the lecturers at Bournemouth University and my colleagues at Poole NHS Foundation Trust. I am grateful to all the help and support from Professor Paul Lewis, who made sure I got this work more widely disseminated.

PDF download