Scene Changers: the briefing in brief

Opening

Scene Changers is the working group Louise and I lead, set up to give the Trust one consistent, transparent way to make decisions. Today is a progress update, and there are a few points where we would value your steer, mainly on the framework and the scoring criteria.

Progress since the last update

When we last spoke you had agreed the tiers, stage gates and framework. We have acted on your feedback and turned it into a working tool, the Decision Navigator.

Three things are done: the early kill switch, which stops weaker or business-as-usual ideas at line manager level before they reach the project group; all your key considerations are built in; and we have kept it deliberately simple, pushing lower-level decisions down for fast local calls.

Two are in progress: the full briefing document is being written, and a working prototype exists and has been tested. Building it with AI keeps the cost to the Trust low. Phase one covers three decision types, change requests, business cases and small projects, and is staff only to start.

Tiers and roles

Decisions are routed by how reversible and how risky they are. Team level stays with the line manager. Operational sits with the department manager and is signed off by the project group. Strategic, the irreversible or high-risk calls, is progressed by an SLT member to Board and Exec.

At the project-group stage we use the DACI model so everyone knows their part: Driver, Approver, Contributors and Informed.

How proposals are scored

Every proposal is scored against the same six weighted criteria, so decisions are consistent and evidence-led, and the tool does the maths automatically. Two are gate criteria, strategic pillars and financial contribution. They act as an early check: a proposal has to score at least four out of six on those two before the rest is scored. The maximum weighted score is 24.

What the score means

The weighted total lands in one of three bands. 18 and above proceeds. 12 to 17 needs a written case and CEO sign-off, or can be revised and resubmitted. Below 12 does not proceed, and goes back to the driver and approver to be reworked before it can return.

Two overrides apply whatever the score: anything over £50,000, or anything flagged as a reputational risk, goes to SLT. The tool always recommends; a person confirms or overrides, and any override is recorded with a short reason.

The open points

These are where a decision from you would let us finalise before testing: values (our thinking is to treat them as a principle for how the process is run rather than a scored criterion, since the scoring stays fixed; a steer on 8 September would help); who sits on the project group; whether an approver can overrule the scored recommendation; hosting and security, which needs Rich in IT; and settling on a single score scale.

The path to launch

The framework and tiers are agreed and the briefing document is being written now. Next is sign-off from stakeholders and SLT, and aligning with the other working groups, especially IMPACT. The 8 September leadership meeting feeds the values question. Testing starts the week of 14 September with a first real proposal, working with Colin Dean first given the size of his team. Then the IT access structure and AI policy need to be in place, and we soft launch the week of 28 September as a staff pilot.

Summing up

The framework is agreed, the tool is being built at low cost, and we are on track for a soft launch the week of 28 September, alongside the Trust's new AI policy. What we would like from you today is a steer on the open points, especially values and the project group. Thank you.