By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

NHS managers' car metaphors belong on the scrapheap

The metaphor-heavy language of the NHS managers can be helpful for them, but Simon Lancaster argues it has a damaging affect on the behaviour of the organisation’s wider workforce

car

The notion of the NHS as a car is engrained in the minds of NHS leaders

Another day, another NHS “drive”. While it is hard to disagree with the sentiment behind Jane Cummings’ “compassion drive”, you have to ask why it was presented in such ugly language, using the self-defeating metaphor of the NHS as a car.

‘Metaphors establish moods, values and feelings that have a direct effect on the way people act’

The NHS has already had a wellness drive, dementia drive and an innovation drive. It’s had more drives than Jeremy Clarkson. Couldn’t they have called it a movement, a campaign or even given it a name, like Fred? Anything would have been better than another drive.

To make matters worse, staff have also been issued with an “engagement toolkit” in case they break down. The mind boggles. What is an “engagement toolkit”? Do they mean a mouth?

The whole metaphor could barely be less appropriate for the aim. Staff are being urged to be more humane, but through the prism of a metaphor which is fundamentally mechanistic.

Why metaphors matter

The trouble is the notion of the NHS as a car is so engrained in the minds of NHS leaders they can scarcely speak in any other way.

The NHS “accelerates” improvement, “goes up a gear” on innovation, “refuels the tank”, “applies the brakes”, “pulls levers”, “puts patients in the driving seat”; who could forget Lord Darzi’s “clinical dashboard”?

Googling “NHS drive” throws up over 11 million results.

This is not just some petty gripe. Metaphors matter because metaphors are not just an articulation of thought, they have a profound effect on people’s behaviour.

There is substantial research showing how metaphors affect behavior across a range of fields, from stock market purchasing activity to political affiliations and even in wars.

The reason is metaphors establish moods, values and feelings that have a direct effect on the decisions people make and the way they act.  

Minis and Mercedes

The machine metaphor does have its benefits. In particular, it can be helpful for NHS managers.

It allows them to plan from a starting assumption of order and predictability (whether or not that is a realistic assumption is a separate question). It allows them to make difficult operational decisions (eg: about redundancies or hospital closures) without the pressure of emotional entanglement.

The metaphor is also one which is readily understood. The metaphor of an organisation as a machine first emerged in 1911 and is ubiquitous in management literature.

But these benefits pale in comparison to the demotivating, dispiriting and damaging effect the metaphor has on the wider workforce.

‘Perhaps the most pernicious effect is the way the machine metaphor detaches staff emotionally from their work’

The machine metaphor strips staff of their humanity, reducing them to nothing more than nuts and bolts: functional components; no more, no less. It tells them they are not there to think or feel but simply to serve their purpose within the machine. What’s more, they know if they fail in their purpose then they will be cast away and replaced without so much as a second thought.

The metaphor also makes the whole notion of change impossible. There’s no such thing as automotive alchemy. You can’t turn a Mini into a Mercedes. As long as this metaphor dominates thinking in the NHS, change is an impossible.

Emotionally detached

But perhaps the most pernicious effect is the way this metaphor detaches staff emotionally from their work. It was this problem, after all, which led to the compassion drive in the first place.

We’ve all seen the signs of this machine-like thinking.

At its mildest, it manifests in the GPs who barely look up from their pads as they issue prescriptions. At its worst, we see it in the horror cases such as that of Kane Gorny, who died of dehydration after his repeated requests for water were denied.

More and more of these stories are emerging. Ann Clywd told the story about how her husband died “like a battery hen” while nurses showed “resentment, indifference and contempt”. One of my close friends was threatened by a midwife as she delivered the placenta: “If you don’t stop wiggling, I’m going to rip your uterus out,” she said.

‘A better metaphor would be the metaphor of the NHS as a person’

I’m fairly sure the staff involved are not fundamentally bad people, that in any other setting they would have been horrified by their own behaviour.

But the trouble is that within the steely confines of a big NHS machine such behavior can appear to be not only acceptable, but implicitly encouraged.

Every time the metaphor is used, this machine-think is re-enforced.

New language

If the NHS is to change and restore public trust, it needs a new metaphor that breeds new values and behavioral patterns.

A better metaphor would be the metaphor of the NHS as a person. This would enable people to connect more easily to the organisation. People who love things automatically personify them anyway.

Steve Jobs spoke of “Apple’s DNA”. Richard Branson speaks of “Virgin’s spirit”. Winston Churchill talked about the “heart of London”.

People who love their homes describe the “character of the house”, someone who loves their car might “take her out for a spin” and someone who loves their smartphone might call it “elegant and beautiful”.

So let’s talk about how the NHS is warm and welcoming, let’s make her fitter and stronger, let’s get her standing tall and proud. This new language will help the NHS rediscover its heart, body and soul.

Machine metaphors might be helpful for managers, but they’re driving everyone else up the wall.

Simon Lancaster is a speechwriter at Bespoke Speechwriting Services

Readers' comments (6)

  • I think of the wards as pretty much the trenches of World War One, but our enemy is a sophisticated modern guerrilla outfit.

    We are bogged down in a quagmire of inefficiency, with our Staff Officers safe many miles behind the lines, but sending us up fresh supplies of paperwork to add to our backpacks, so we sink ever deeper into the quagmire, as the Officers blame us for the impending defeat “Fight harder, fight longer, do more fighting, we are bound to win …”

    The dementia screening form is the final straw that has broken the back of my enthusiasm – if we ever get the time to work out that the patient has dementia, we still do not get to meet a nurse to share the information and plan the appropriate care! My “Nurse at Bedside” or “Report from Nurse before Bedside” rate remains stubbornly below 50%

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • I think the author raises some interesting issues but think the comment on the NHS Employers staff engagement toolkit (which I should confess I am a contributor to) does not seek to treat staff as machines that breakdown. It is a toolkit for organisations on how to better support their staff and in particular seek and act on feedback from them. If Mr Lancaster has the time over the festive period I challenge him to find any mechanistic language in the document. I also think that his critique of the nursing strategy is aiming at the wrong target as one of the main aims of the strategy is to support emotional reconnection and support caring and compassion. I fear that the metaphor bashing has somewhat overtaken the argument in what is otherwise a thought provoking and interesting article. I hope it provokes some further debate on these important issues. Steven Weeks NHSE (in a personal capacity)

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Simon Lancaster

    Hi Steven

    Thanks very much for the thoughtful comment. I've already read both the documents - the compassion drive and the engagement toolkit. They are both excellent resources and I don't doubt for one second they were both well-intended.

    My point is about the metaphorically imagery that was contained (deliberately or not) in the titles. The compassion DRIVE and the engagement TOOLKIT both feed into this wider metaphor of THE NHS IS A CAR - a mechanistic metaphor, regularly used across the NHS. Because these images appear in the title, those images then evidently shaped thinking in the drafting process (e.g. the engagement toolkit describes tools and levers etc) and also the press reporting (lead story on BBC News reported a compassion drive).

    This meant that the image of a DRIVE and a TOOLKIT then dominated and determined how people thought, felt and acted on the whole propositions. Hence the metaphors both wound up defeating the aims they were intended to serve. The image of a compassion DRIVE is not going to motivate greater humanity, because cars are not known for being humane - they are precisely the opposite: mechanistic. Nor is an engagement TOOLKIT a helpful image because it suggests staff are nuts and bolts, with NHS managers standing there with screwdrivers, hammers and spanners ready to nail them down!

    I'd be happy to talk about this more if you like, or indeed to come and speak at an NHS Employers conference more about this. The NHS will never change unless the language changes. Change the language and you change the thinking and you change the behaviours.

    Best wishes,

    Simon Lancaster



    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Excellent article. This may be a tad of a challenge for the NHS but the best metaphors of all are those generated by the staff themselves.
    As in, when YOUR NHS is working at its best, that's like what........................?

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Oh dear, where would the NHS be without its metaphors, however inappropriate they are. Sit in any senior manager/board level meeting and you will soon have a full house of lingo bingo. The worrying thing is that people use these metaphors without understanding what they really mean - or giving any thought as to how they will be interpreted by others.
    I completely understand your argument Simon and I do agree with a lot of what you say. Perhaps if we used more humanistic language in the NHS people would act in a more human(e) and caring manner. However, it could be that some people in the NHS use mechanistic language as a defence - by de-humanising the whole process to protect themselves because to care too much makes them vulnerable and fallible.
    And Anon 9.07 - I thought your description of wards being like the WWI trenches all too real ...

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • I think the metaphor is entirely apposite - as is stated elsewhere on the HSJ website, the changes to the NHS are a car crash. At the moment we're watching it happen in slow motion, and it's horrible to see. I should dial 999, but...

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

Sign up to get the latest health policy news direct to your inbox