Strategy Development Group 1Meeting One – What happened? 15th April 2014

To begin…

15 people attended the first meeting of Strategic Development Group 1 on Tuesday 15th April.

The group included staff representing all Nordoff Robbins departments and representatives from external stakeholders.

Miranda invited everyone to pair up with someone they did not know well and interview them about who they were, their reasons for taking part in this group and their hopes for this meeting.

Hopes for this group

That we can capitalise on NR’s potential to bring our expertise to a much larger range of people across the country

That we can expand our service delivery (become truly ‘national’)

That we can be clearer about where NR is going, how to get there and how to work together

That group participants will be inspired, happy and comfortable

That we ensure psychodynamic and developmental aspects of music therapy are represented

That we are able to meet the large unmet need for music therapy while “keeping the oil pure” – i.e. not compromising the essence of the NR approach

That we are inspired to think together to find new ways to deliver services

Hopes for this group

That we find a collective way forward, allow all voices to be heard and set priorities

That we can find ways to do more of what we do well

That we collectively come up with an achievable and effective plan

That we can deliver more in a cost-effective manner

That we can achieve a shared, unified vision and way forward

That we can take NR’s work to more people

That professional experience (including of strategic reviews) can be used to the benefit of NR

That we integrate learning from the regions - and see how it all fits to find a way of optimising reach based on experience

That we can ‘package’ our services differently

Question for all staff…

What do you hope to see this group achieve?

Remember you can have your say at any time, just email haveyoursay@nordoff-robbns.org.uk

Next, Miranda took the group through the strategic process and decisions that have taken place so far…

What has already been decided?

Reason for the strategic review:

To confront, in consultation with staff, trustees and major stakeholders, the real-world issues that impact on Nordoff

Robbins future sustainability. Whilst protecting the quality of service delivery, core values and passion, and the

commitment to transforming lives.

Vision 2020

The vision:

‘Securing the essence of Nordoff Robbins and, together, building a sustainable and impactful future’

Vision 2020

• To increase by 100% the number of people whose lives we transform

• To establish NR as the music industry’s charity of choice whilst broadening income streams to increase our income in proportion to our reach

• To build on our profile and presence to became a household name in relation to music therapy

Vision 2020

• To develop an organisational structure that supports our business ensuring NR is flexible, responsive, supported through a diversity of raised and earned income, is the ‘partner of choice’ providing music therapy to all who need/want it, an employer of choice and a provider of high quality volunteering opportunities.

Strategy Development Groups

• Group 1: Maximising our reach (services and knowledge)

• Group 2: Protecting and increasing our income

• Group 3: Protecting and developing the NR essence - by training enough practitioners to meet need and curating reflective practice and research.

The three groups will interlink

The group agreed that:

Given that this group (Group 1) is focusing on NR’s reach, if we find something more relevant to one of the other groups, we will park it and pass it on to the relevant co-chairs.

The three groups are interdependent so we need to take a holistic view. To this end, the co-chairs of the income group (Group 2) are taking part in this group.

The Process

• 2013: The vision and strategic intent were developed by CEO, SMT and trustees

• 2014: March - JuneStrategic development groups 1, 2 and 3

• 2014: July SMT/Trustee synthesis meeting

• 2014: Sept-December Strategic implementation group

Strategy Group 1

• First meeting 14th April 2014What do we mean by ‘reach’ and what questions do we want this group to explore?

HOMEWORK IN BETWEEN

• Second meeting 1st May 2014Our strategic questions on ‘reach’ and our strategic

answers HOMEWORK IN BETWEEN

• Third meeting 3rd June 2014Review of the draft to be taken to the synthesis group of trustees and SMT

Other sources of evidence for this group

• Consultations with Music Therapists - ‘have your say’

• Interviews and discussions throughout NR

• Asking people who use our services

• Asking partner organisations

• Asking our competitors

Why are we doing this?

• So that more people and communities can benefit from Nordoff Robbins services, in more places and in more ways

• Putting the service user first, at the heart of everything we do

How has it been for you?

• With a partner, the group spent 5 minutes each saying what their experience of the NR strategy process has been so far. Had they been involved? Not involved? Heard about it?

• And what their hopes and fears were for the strategy?

What did the group think of this strategic review?

Current leadership is our best chance of delivering this strategy

The process will lead to positive change at NR

Scope to improve even without radical change

Data on our services is a powerful tool to help direct change

It will allow us to reach more people

Huge potential for improvement if we’re brave enough to seize this opportunity

Desire to explore different sources of income

Fears for this group

We may lose the NR approach to music therapy

We won’t have the funds to invest in the things we need to invest in to fully implement the strategic intents

We may not be able to bring NR staff with us on this journey

Implementation may not happen – risk of back-sliding to business as usual –the strategy needs to be embedded at all levels

We might dilute the quality of what the deliver

In pursuit of a target (e.g. increased levels of service delivery) we may lose sight of what is really important (e.g. may chase quantity over quantity) – need to consider impact as well as growth

Process is London-centric and staff outside London are not sufficiently engaged

Fears for this group continued…

We may shy away from difficult issues and tough decisions so these are not addressed as part of this process

Personal desires/passions may get in the way of the process which is bigger than any individual

May be unwillingness to refocus resources if this means reducing service delivery in some areas

People won’t feel able to be honest and express their feelings

We’re lead by our hearts rather than by facts and evidence

Polarity between different therapeutic viewpoints

We pursue income and reach but then can’t deliver

We neglect to consider other approaches that may benefit clients

The consultation process isn’t a real consultation process

Fears for this group continued…

HCPC demands erode the essence of the NR approach

Current financial climate makes it difficult to sell services, particularly to the NHS and even high-quality evidence may not be persuasive

We fail to diversify our income streams to sustain growth

That staff outside the “core” of the strategic process don’t feel trust or engaged in the process

That in pursuit of increased service delivery, the practice of music therapy becomes formulaic

We neglect the importance of research in substantiating the claims we make about music therapy.

People aren’t honest during this process so the resulting plan doesn’t enjoy staff buy-in and therefore fails

We will waste our energy by not focusing our attention

Fears for this group continued…

Having to turn people away who want/need our services

That we lose commitment to our most valuable resource – our MTs

Difficult to bring everyone with us and make the organisation not patchy

That the impact of the strategy isn’t really nationally spread

That we don’t get funding and resources to do larger-scale research which will help us to build an evidence base

Potential danger of not preserving quality and creativity of NR music therapy and not keeping MTs involved

Potential danger of not realising implications for the charity and fundraising of wanting ‘national coverage’.

That we don’t all end up saying “we believe in this strategy!”

Question for all staff…

What are your fears for this group?

Remember you can have your say at any time, just email haveyoursay@nordoff-robbns.org.uk

Packaging our services

The group discussed the idea of packaging our services and offers as an organisation.

Repackaging our services in a way that is appealing to commissioners may be helpful, possibly by working jointly with other organisations/providers to provide an attractive, holistic solution for commissioners.

The group then went on to discuss what ‘REACH’ means and Rachel shared her thoughts…

What is ‘reach’ and why does it matter?

• ‘the extent or range of something's application, effect, or influence’

• ‘Who we work with, offering what services, and where’

What’s your take on it?Rachel’s Story

Where did I start?

•Asked to grow the service

•Responded to everyone that came and asked us

•Responded to where the gaps were

•‘Let’s do as much as we can for as many people as we can in as many places as we can!’

•The NR approach can help everybody

What’s your take on it?Rachel’s Story

What happened to my thinking?•Danger of spreading ourselves too thinly•Need to focus finite resources to help the people, places and communities that will benefit most•Need to focus in order to build evidence base and reputation

Should we aim to reach/focus on:•The largest number of people?•The widest geographical spread?•Certain specific client groups? •Certain specific settings or organisations?

What’s your take on it?Rachel’s Story

And now?•It may not be about ‘choosing’ one client group, age range or geographical area over another.

•Can we focus on people who are the most ‘hard to reach’ and isolated or who struggle most with communicating and:

•Can we focus on identifying and fostering communities to which they belong and can contribute?

•Do we also have a special role to play in helping to prevent future problems from developing?

What’s your take on it?Rachel’s Story

And also…•We need to maximise our reach in terms of knowledge

•Who needs to know about us?– Potential service users, their families, carers and

friends– Funders– People who might work for us and help deliver the

service– General public

What we think ‘reach’ means

The group split into three sub-groups each looking at the question of what reach is.

•What does ‘reach’ mean to you and why?

•What does NR have to take into account in order to get where it needs to be?

•What are the group’s conclusions?

The results! Group A

What does ‘reach’ mean to you and why?All of the things Rachel said! How far and wide?!Client groups, geography, product etcLobbying could increase our reach – influencing national policies, LEAs, PCTs We need to define what reach means and how far and wide we are spread! Who, how, where

and what! Where is the demand?

What does NR have to take into account to get where it needs to be?What is the product? Can it remain as it is? Does it need to changeWe need to define what is meant by ‘double the number of lives transformed’ – what is

‘transformed?Who will deliver growth and how does one become capable of it?We need to decide who we want to reachWe need to be clear on our impact and communicate itWe need to take into account existing knowledge

What are the group’s conclusions?There needs to be some sort of consensus on hard and fast measuresWe’re not sure how we’ll get there!

The results! Group BWhat does ‘reach’ mean to you and why?

Who? Partners, society, policy makers, families, clients, communitiesHow? Geographically, different approaches/sectors, client groups Filling gaps in the market where we can be leaders – e.g. services for ex-service people but avoid

being purely demand-led; need a strategic response to demandHow can we be as available as possible to as many different peopleBased in a wider setting/community setting/PO/private referrals practice/flexibility to take referrals

What does NR have to take into account in order to get where it needs to be?Training: advanced training or ‘conversion’ training to have a broader practitioner (but what is the

essence of NR)To grow and develop broader practice will be beneficial: Music Therapists as the essence but we

also offer a variety of other services

What are the group’s conclusions?Music Therapy VS Music ServicesAdventure NROnline presence – get the message out there!Links with Universities

The results! Group CWhat does ‘reach’ mean to you and why?

Geographical – we’re not a national charity yetA music therapist available within X miles of anyoneSpecific client groups – the very young, the most isolated, those living with long term issues etcThe NR response is part of our reach

What does NR have to take into account in order to get where it needs to be?NR trained therapists undertaking a variety of musical interventions, underpinned by the NR

Quality Standards FrameworkWhat counts as Music Therapy?Availability of funding – but NOT to be wholly led by this – need to follow need!Risk that if partner organisations think they can get similar results from a volunteer rather than a

trained therapist, why would they pay for a therapist?

ConclusionsOur focus should be on need, not on specific client groups.Is our geographical reach important? Do we need to be truly national? There are other ways to increase reach – not just geography Use of volunteers is important - give them high-quality opportunities

Discussion

• Aim of our discussion:

To agree on our definition of ‘reach’ and why it matters

Did we agree on an answer? What is ‘reach?’

From the three groups discussions – we attempted a ‘synthesis’…

What is reach?Geographical Client group

Need Funding sources

External perception & profile

Issues to take into accountTraining/education Efficacy

Identity of NR Definition of quality

Impact Generic skills

Volunteers Existing demand

Using existing knowledge Data

What strategic questions shall we ask?

The group were invited to write on as many post-its as they could, questions that they thought this group needed to answer in order for a sensible strategy on ‘reach’ to be developed

The wall was completely jam-packed with questions!!

Any themes emerging?

The group put the questions into the following themes:

1.Money/income/charging

2.Workforce/structure

3.Clients/Product

4.Terms of reference/scope

5.Risks

6.Evidence

7.Marketing & Comms

Homework

Miranda asked for volunteers to be theme group leaders and write up and explore each theme in advance of the next meeting on Thursday 1st May. The theme group leaders are as follows:-

1.Money/income/charging Sarah Cosby

2.Workforce/Structure Nigel Hartley

3.Clients/Product Stuart Wood, Oksana Zharinova-Sanderson

4.Terms of reference/scope Rachel Verney

5.Risks David Robinson

6.Evidence Camilla Farrant

7.Marketing & Comms Rosie Atherton & Lindsay McHale

PLEASE SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE THEMES WITH THE GROUP LEADERS!

Feedback

Some snippets of feedback from the meeting…

“Will be an interesting challenge to take forward.”

“Lots of food for thought – in particular the potential to broaden our offer whilst maintaining the essence of NR Music Therapy

and that NR therapists are flexible”

“Will the group agree on action?”

Date of next meeting is 1 May 2014