Medical staff slam lab management

By MARTIN JOHNSTON health reporter

Staff of New Zealand's leading medical laboratory have slated its management style in a review carried out by consultants.

Pathologists, technologists and scientists at the troubled LabPlus in Auckland say it is organised around "fiefdoms" and communication systems are weak.

A key staff concern is that "clinical input has been marginalised," say consultants Cap Gemini Ernst & Young in their draft report.

The Weekend Herald obtained a copy under the Official Information Act from the Auckland District Health Board, operator of LabPlus.

The board commissioned the organisation and management review after International Accreditation NZ (IANZ) suspended accreditation of the virology/immunology and chemical pathology sections last December. It was restored last month.

The $20 million LabPlus, which combined 13 previously separate laboratories, had been officially opened only 18 days before the suspension.

IANZ highlighted many problems. Some urgent tests were taking up to 10 times longer to return than previously.

In the Ernst & Young report, on a scale where 5 is the highest score, staff rated the management no higher than 2.3 on seven criteria, including leadership and communication.

"It indicates that LabPlus staff believe that the organisation's management practices only occasionally correspond with good management practices," the report states.

Key themes identified by the consultants through a staff questionnaire and reinforced by interviews and group discussions include:

* There are too many layers of management and this impedes effective decision-making.

* There is not a problem-solving culture.

* Quality-control systems are weak and inconsistent.

* LabPlus works primarily in isolation from the board's corporate divisions, like finance and health and safety.

Staff also told the consultants that for at least the past five years the board's laboratories had reduced support for scientific research and development.



Performance management is also inadequate, the consultants say. "Non-compliance is not reprimanded nor is exceptional effort rewarded."

Recommendations in the report include implementing a unified quality-control system, supporting research and development, clarifying the role of clinical director and creating a clinical advisory group.

The board's chief operating officer, Neil Woodhams, said most of the recommendations in the consultants' report were being implemented although a critical one - the new organisational shape of LabPlus - had not been. That shape was still being worked out and staff were being consulted.

Changes had already been made on quality control, bringing this part of LabPlus' work under the board's corporate quality system.

Mr Woodhams said he had been surprised to learn of the LabPlus staff concerns. He believed the LabPlus problems had been exacerbated by the relocation last year.