Suchergebnisse

Pilot projects are increasingly used as a mechanism to enact organisational change, particularly government policy. Information technology's centrality to organisations often makes it key to the introduction of new processes. However, it can give rise to workarounds as employees circumvent impediments it presents by rejecting its prescribed use. Workarounds tend to be conceptualised dichotomously, as either 'good' problem solving, or 'bad' subversion of the technology. In pilot projects, workarounds are more ambiguous because those that support projects' successful completion in the short‐term may undermine day to day operations longer term. We draw on interview data from a policy pilot in general practice in the National Health Service in England aimed at extending access to care. We problematise the dichotomous conceptualisation of workarounds, finding they can be simultaneously supportive and undermining of policy pilots. Workarounds thereby become political, as employees are required to trade‐off consequences for themselves and the wider organisation.

In spite of their widespread use in policy making in the UK and elsewhere, there is a relatively sparse literature specifically devoted to policy pilots. Recent research on policy piloting has focused on the role of pilots in making policy work in accordance with national agendas. Taking this as a point of departure, the present paper develops the notion of pilots doing policy work. It does this by situating piloting within established theories of policy formulation and implementation, and illustrating using an empirical case. Our case is drawn from a qualitative policy ethnography of a local government pilot programme aiming to extend access to healthcare services. Our case explores the collective entrepreneurship of regional policy makers together with local pilot volunteers.We argue that pilots work to mobilise and manage the ambiguity and conflict associated with particular policy goals, and in their structure and design, shape action towards particular outcomes. We conclude with a discussion of the generative but managed role which piloting affords to local implementers.