Sonja Marjanovic - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Sonja Marjanovic

is a not-for-profit research organisation that helps improve policy and decision making through r... more is a not-for-profit research organisation that helps improve policy and decision making through research and analysis. To learn more about RAND Europe, visit www.randeurope.org. To learn more about RAND Europe's work in health and wellbeing, visit www.rand.org/randeurope/research/health Research Integrity Our mission to help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behaviour. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles. About the Health Services Management Centre (HSMC) The HSMC at the University of Birmingham is one of the UK's foremost centres for research, evaluation, teaching and professional development for health and social care organisations. HSMC has established a unique reputation as a 'critical friend' of the healthcare community and strives constantly to bridge the gap between research and practice. For more information visit www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/social-policy/departments/health-services-management-centre/index.aspx RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

This report, commissioned by the Alzheimer's Society, aims to inform funding and capacity-bui... more This report, commissioned by the Alzheimer's Society, aims to inform funding and capacity-building efforts in UK dementia research by examining the current research and workforce landscape, and associated strengths and gaps.

Rand health quarterly, 2016

In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-comm... more In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-commissioned for a further three years following an evaluation by RAND Europe. During this new phase of the programme, we conducted a real-time evaluation, the aim of which was to allow for reflection on and adjustment of the programme on an on-going basis as events unfold. This approach also allowed for participants on the programme to contribute to and positively engage in the evaluation. The study aimed to understand the outputs and impacts from the programme, and to test the underlying assumptions behind the NIHR Leadership Programme as a science policy intervention. Evidence on outputs and impacts of the programme were collected around the motivations and expectations of participants, programme design and individual-, institutional- and system-level impacts.

is a not-for-profit organisation whose mission is to help improve policy and decisionmaking throu... more is a not-for-profit organisation whose mission is to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org www.randeurope.org iii The Department of Health and the Wellcome Trust, in cooperation with NHS England, asked RAND Europe to conduct a limited consultation with key stakeholders about the practicality of measures and incentives proposed as part of the Accelerated Access Review (AAR). In particular, the AAR interim report suggests a number of propositions with specific roles for Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs), teaching and specialist hospitals and other secondary care providers.

The RAND Corporation is a research organisation that develops solutions to public policy challeng... more The RAND Corporation is a research organisation that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is not-for-profit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html.

It is related to a wider, two-year study of innovation in the NHS being conducted by RAND Europe ... more It is related to a wider, two-year study of innovation in the NHS being conducted by RAND Europe and the University of Manchester, but represents a discrete stream of work. In this report, we introduce the background and context for the SBRI Healthcare study (Chapter 1), describe the interview and survey methods used (Chapter 2), and discuss the main results (Chapter 3) and conclusions (Chapter 4). The accompanying appendices provide further details on the methods and results from the interviews and surveys conducted. RAND Europe is a not-for-profit policy research organisation that helps to improve policy and decisionmaking in the public interest, through research and analysis. RAND Europe's clients include European governments, institutions, NGOs and firms with a need for rigorous, independent, multidisciplinary analysis. This document has been peer reviewed in accordance with RAND Europe's quality assurance standards and as such can be portrayed as a RAND Europe document.

Science and Public Policy, 2020

Healthcare systems with limited resources face rising demand pressures. Healthcare decision-maker... more Healthcare systems with limited resources face rising demand pressures. Healthcare decision-makers increasingly recognise the potential of innovation to help respond to this challenge and to support high-quality care. However, comprehensive and actionable evidence on how to realise this potential is lacking. We adopt sociotechnical systems and innovation systems theoretical perspectives to examine conditions that can support and sustain innovating healthcare systems. We use primary data focussing on England (with 670 contributions over time) and triangulate findings against globally-relevant literature. We discuss the complexity of factors influencing an innovating healthcare system’s ability to support the development and uptake of innovations and share practical learning about changes in policy, culture, and behaviour that could support system improvement. Three themes are examined in detail: skills, capabilities, and leadership; motivations and accountabilities; and collaboration...

Aims  A prioritisation survey was conducted to help identify what stakeholders in the health sys... more Aims  A prioritisation survey was conducted to help identify what stakeholders in the health system consider to be the priority interventions for supporting an innovative health system (be they existing support mechanisms or to support capacity-building).  Stakeholders were consulted on the potential impact, sustainability and scalability of initiatives and interventions seeking to enable the development and uptake of innovation in the health system. The focus was on different interventions intended to support key drivers of innovation. 1 Design and implementation  The survey, which was open for 7.5 weeks (13 June 2017 to 4 August 2017), examined six drivers of innovation in the health system identified by Marjanovic, Sim et al. (2017a, 2017b): skills, capabilities and leadership; motivations and accountabilities; the information and evidence environment; relationships and networks; patient and public involvement and engagement; and funding and commissioning.  For each driver/theme, respondents were asked to choose (from a longlist) three innovation-related initiatives, interventions or support mechanisms taking place or identified as needed in the health system, that they felt would be most important and likely to lead to impact on the overall system. Respondents were given the opportunity to provide examples of initiatives they thought worked particularly well or not as well as intended.  256 people responded to the survey overall (representatives of innovation and improvement networks, healthcare professionals and providers, commissioning, the private sector, higher education institutions and research institutes, charity and public and patient voice, and policymakers). 2 Key findings The most frequently selected initiatives (percentage of respondents given in brackets) and overarching findings for each theme are described below. Skills, capabilities and leadership:  Organisations designed to share knowledge, information and learning, raise awareness about innovation opportunities and help nurture relationships to match supply and demand (59.0 per cent).  Professional networking opportunities and establishing 'communities of practice' (52.6 per cent).  Initiatives to facilitate cross-sector learning (51.4 per cent). The selected initiatives are all related to knowledge-sharing and communication activities; initiatives specifically related to training were selected fewer times overall, although training through coaching and mentoring seems to be particularly valued by healthcare professional and provider representatives (and more so than formal curriculum-based training). 1 The interventions were identified in Phase 1 of this study, but stakeholders were also given the opportunity to flag additional needs. The survey, which was implemented using the online survey tool SurveyMonkey, 5 was sent by email to 955 individuals spanning healthcare professionals and providers, members of innovation and improvement networks, commissioners, academics, the private sector and policymakers. 6 The initial email list was made up of contacts from prior rounds of this study (see Marjanovic, Sim et al. 2017a, 2017b). We also contacted members of key innovation, quality improvement and health research networks (such as Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs), Vanguards, Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), Test Beds, Innovation Hubs), using email addresses from scale implantation and use of the initiatives within regions, between regions and nationally; sustainability refers to the potential for sustained use of the initiative by the health system over time.

Rand health quarterly, 2011

The Department of Health (England) commissioned this evaluation of the pilot Health Technology Co... more The Department of Health (England) commissioned this evaluation of the pilot Health Technology Cooperatives (HTCs), which are part of its research infrastructure. Its purpose is to explore how this initiative has affected relationships between clinical, industrial and academic partners; how the HTCs fit into the current health innovation landscape; and the alignment of HTC activities to the goals set out in the NIHR strategy. Since the HTC scheme was intended to focus on medical devices, this review investigated how medical device development is being pursued by other similar entities in England, Australia and the USA. The key question was whether the institutional relationships initiated by the HTCs are contributing to the health research system in England and if this scheme is the most effective way of pursuing these relationships. This review had no specific theory or hypothesis to test, so information was gathered so as to allow key conclusions to be drawn and linked to existing...

is a not-for-profit organisation that helps to improve policy and decision making through researc... more is a not-for-profit organisation that helps to improve policy and decision making through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the sponsor.

Forum 2015 Abstracts, 2015

Rand health quarterly, Jan 29, 2016

In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-comm... more In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-commissioned for a further three years following an evaluation by RAND Europe. During this new phase of the programme, we conducted a real-time evaluation, the aim of which was to allow for reflection on and adjustment of the programme on an on-going basis as events unfold. This approach also allowed for participants on the programme to contribute to and positively engage in the evaluation. The study aimed to understand the outputs and impacts from the programme, and to test the underlying assumptions behind the NIHR Leadership Programme as a science policy intervention. Evidence on outputs and impacts of the programme were collected around the motivations and expectations of participants, programme design and individual-, institutional- and system-level impacts.

Rand health quarterly, Jan 30, 2015

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) programme suppor... more The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) programme supports the development of innovative medical technologies for patient benefit. The i4i product development stream involves collaborative projects between at least two partners from academia, the NHS and industry. Medical technology innovators apply for funding for one to three years, through a peer review-based process that includes presentation to a selection panel. The funding and business advice provided by i4i support the development of early-stage innovations, generally at proof of concept and prototype stages. Since its inception the product development stream has identified and supported 170 projects, led by 146 principal investigators (PIs). RAND Europe evaluated the programme, with the aim of identifying its outputs and impacts and examining the factors influencing performance. The evaluation findings should help inform the future of the programme. The evaluation used a multi-method...

is a not-for-profit research organisation that helps improve policy and decision making through r... more is a not-for-profit research organisation that helps improve policy and decision making through research and analysis. To learn more about RAND Europe, visit www.randeurope.org. To learn more about RAND Europe's work in health and wellbeing, visit www.rand.org/randeurope/research/health Research Integrity Our mission to help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behaviour. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles. About the Health Services Management Centre (HSMC) The HSMC at the University of Birmingham is one of the UK's foremost centres for research, evaluation, teaching and professional development for health and social care organisations. HSMC has established a unique reputation as a 'critical friend' of the healthcare community and strives constantly to bridge the gap between research and practice. For more information visit www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/social-policy/departments/health-services-management-centre/index.aspx RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

This report, commissioned by the Alzheimer's Society, aims to inform funding and capacity-bui... more This report, commissioned by the Alzheimer's Society, aims to inform funding and capacity-building efforts in UK dementia research by examining the current research and workforce landscape, and associated strengths and gaps.

Rand health quarterly, 2016

In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-comm... more In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-commissioned for a further three years following an evaluation by RAND Europe. During this new phase of the programme, we conducted a real-time evaluation, the aim of which was to allow for reflection on and adjustment of the programme on an on-going basis as events unfold. This approach also allowed for participants on the programme to contribute to and positively engage in the evaluation. The study aimed to understand the outputs and impacts from the programme, and to test the underlying assumptions behind the NIHR Leadership Programme as a science policy intervention. Evidence on outputs and impacts of the programme were collected around the motivations and expectations of participants, programme design and individual-, institutional- and system-level impacts.

is a not-for-profit organisation whose mission is to help improve policy and decisionmaking throu... more is a not-for-profit organisation whose mission is to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org www.randeurope.org iii The Department of Health and the Wellcome Trust, in cooperation with NHS England, asked RAND Europe to conduct a limited consultation with key stakeholders about the practicality of measures and incentives proposed as part of the Accelerated Access Review (AAR). In particular, the AAR interim report suggests a number of propositions with specific roles for Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs), teaching and specialist hospitals and other secondary care providers.

The RAND Corporation is a research organisation that develops solutions to public policy challeng... more The RAND Corporation is a research organisation that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is not-for-profit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html.

It is related to a wider, two-year study of innovation in the NHS being conducted by RAND Europe ... more It is related to a wider, two-year study of innovation in the NHS being conducted by RAND Europe and the University of Manchester, but represents a discrete stream of work. In this report, we introduce the background and context for the SBRI Healthcare study (Chapter 1), describe the interview and survey methods used (Chapter 2), and discuss the main results (Chapter 3) and conclusions (Chapter 4). The accompanying appendices provide further details on the methods and results from the interviews and surveys conducted. RAND Europe is a not-for-profit policy research organisation that helps to improve policy and decisionmaking in the public interest, through research and analysis. RAND Europe's clients include European governments, institutions, NGOs and firms with a need for rigorous, independent, multidisciplinary analysis. This document has been peer reviewed in accordance with RAND Europe's quality assurance standards and as such can be portrayed as a RAND Europe document.

Science and Public Policy, 2020

Healthcare systems with limited resources face rising demand pressures. Healthcare decision-maker... more Healthcare systems with limited resources face rising demand pressures. Healthcare decision-makers increasingly recognise the potential of innovation to help respond to this challenge and to support high-quality care. However, comprehensive and actionable evidence on how to realise this potential is lacking. We adopt sociotechnical systems and innovation systems theoretical perspectives to examine conditions that can support and sustain innovating healthcare systems. We use primary data focussing on England (with 670 contributions over time) and triangulate findings against globally-relevant literature. We discuss the complexity of factors influencing an innovating healthcare system’s ability to support the development and uptake of innovations and share practical learning about changes in policy, culture, and behaviour that could support system improvement. Three themes are examined in detail: skills, capabilities, and leadership; motivations and accountabilities; and collaboration...

Aims  A prioritisation survey was conducted to help identify what stakeholders in the health sys... more Aims  A prioritisation survey was conducted to help identify what stakeholders in the health system consider to be the priority interventions for supporting an innovative health system (be they existing support mechanisms or to support capacity-building).  Stakeholders were consulted on the potential impact, sustainability and scalability of initiatives and interventions seeking to enable the development and uptake of innovation in the health system. The focus was on different interventions intended to support key drivers of innovation. 1 Design and implementation  The survey, which was open for 7.5 weeks (13 June 2017 to 4 August 2017), examined six drivers of innovation in the health system identified by Marjanovic, Sim et al. (2017a, 2017b): skills, capabilities and leadership; motivations and accountabilities; the information and evidence environment; relationships and networks; patient and public involvement and engagement; and funding and commissioning.  For each driver/theme, respondents were asked to choose (from a longlist) three innovation-related initiatives, interventions or support mechanisms taking place or identified as needed in the health system, that they felt would be most important and likely to lead to impact on the overall system. Respondents were given the opportunity to provide examples of initiatives they thought worked particularly well or not as well as intended.  256 people responded to the survey overall (representatives of innovation and improvement networks, healthcare professionals and providers, commissioning, the private sector, higher education institutions and research institutes, charity and public and patient voice, and policymakers). 2 Key findings The most frequently selected initiatives (percentage of respondents given in brackets) and overarching findings for each theme are described below. Skills, capabilities and leadership:  Organisations designed to share knowledge, information and learning, raise awareness about innovation opportunities and help nurture relationships to match supply and demand (59.0 per cent).  Professional networking opportunities and establishing 'communities of practice' (52.6 per cent).  Initiatives to facilitate cross-sector learning (51.4 per cent). The selected initiatives are all related to knowledge-sharing and communication activities; initiatives specifically related to training were selected fewer times overall, although training through coaching and mentoring seems to be particularly valued by healthcare professional and provider representatives (and more so than formal curriculum-based training). 1 The interventions were identified in Phase 1 of this study, but stakeholders were also given the opportunity to flag additional needs. The survey, which was implemented using the online survey tool SurveyMonkey, 5 was sent by email to 955 individuals spanning healthcare professionals and providers, members of innovation and improvement networks, commissioners, academics, the private sector and policymakers. 6 The initial email list was made up of contacts from prior rounds of this study (see Marjanovic, Sim et al. 2017a, 2017b). We also contacted members of key innovation, quality improvement and health research networks (such as Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs), Vanguards, Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), Test Beds, Innovation Hubs), using email addresses from scale implantation and use of the initiatives within regions, between regions and nationally; sustainability refers to the potential for sustained use of the initiative by the health system over time.

Rand health quarterly, 2011

The Department of Health (England) commissioned this evaluation of the pilot Health Technology Co... more The Department of Health (England) commissioned this evaluation of the pilot Health Technology Cooperatives (HTCs), which are part of its research infrastructure. Its purpose is to explore how this initiative has affected relationships between clinical, industrial and academic partners; how the HTCs fit into the current health innovation landscape; and the alignment of HTC activities to the goals set out in the NIHR strategy. Since the HTC scheme was intended to focus on medical devices, this review investigated how medical device development is being pursued by other similar entities in England, Australia and the USA. The key question was whether the institutional relationships initiated by the HTCs are contributing to the health research system in England and if this scheme is the most effective way of pursuing these relationships. This review had no specific theory or hypothesis to test, so information was gathered so as to allow key conclusions to be drawn and linked to existing...

is a not-for-profit organisation that helps to improve policy and decision making through researc... more is a not-for-profit organisation that helps to improve policy and decision making through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the sponsor.

Forum 2015 Abstracts, 2015

Rand health quarterly, Jan 29, 2016

In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-comm... more In early 2012, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) leadership programme was re-commissioned for a further three years following an evaluation by RAND Europe. During this new phase of the programme, we conducted a real-time evaluation, the aim of which was to allow for reflection on and adjustment of the programme on an on-going basis as events unfold. This approach also allowed for participants on the programme to contribute to and positively engage in the evaluation. The study aimed to understand the outputs and impacts from the programme, and to test the underlying assumptions behind the NIHR Leadership Programme as a science policy intervention. Evidence on outputs and impacts of the programme were collected around the motivations and expectations of participants, programme design and individual-, institutional- and system-level impacts.

Rand health quarterly, Jan 30, 2015

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) programme suppor... more The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) programme supports the development of innovative medical technologies for patient benefit. The i4i product development stream involves collaborative projects between at least two partners from academia, the NHS and industry. Medical technology innovators apply for funding for one to three years, through a peer review-based process that includes presentation to a selection panel. The funding and business advice provided by i4i support the development of early-stage innovations, generally at proof of concept and prototype stages. Since its inception the product development stream has identified and supported 170 projects, led by 146 principal investigators (PIs). RAND Europe evaluated the programme, with the aim of identifying its outputs and impacts and examining the factors influencing performance. The evaluation findings should help inform the future of the programme. The evaluation used a multi-method...