Health workforce governance and professions: a re-analysis of New Zealand’s primary care workforce policy actors

Abstract

BackgroundThis article contributes to the health workforce planning literature by exploring the dynamics of health professions in New Zealand’s Primary Care sector and deriving broad lessons for an international audience. Professions tend influence health policy and governance decisions and practices to retain their place, status and influence. Therefore, understanding their power dynamics and the positions that they have on workforce policies and issues assists workforce governance or health system reform plans.MethodsUsing the infrequently reported health workforce policy tool, actor analysis, a reanalysis of previously collected data is undertaken using an actor-based framework for the study of professionalism. Two models were developed, (1) the framework’s original four-actor model and (2) a five-actor model for the comparison of the Medical and Nurse professions. Existing workforce actor data were reclassified, formatted, and entered into actor analysis software to reveal the professions’ relative power, inter-relationships and strategic workforce issue positions.ResultsIn the four-actor model, the Organised user actor is found to be most influential, while the others are found to be dependent. In the five-actor model, the Medical and Nurse professions are individually more influential than their combined position in the four-actor model. Practicing professionals and Organised user actors have strong converging inter-relationships over workforce issues in both models, though in the five-actor model, the Nurse profession has weaker coherency than the Medical profession. The Medical and Nurse professions are found to be in opposition over the workforce issues labelled divisive.ConclusionsThese results reflect the professions’ potential to influence New Zealand’s Primary Care sector, indicating their power and influence over a range of policy and reform measures. As such, the four lessons that are derived from the case indicate to policy makers that they should be aware of situational contexts and actor power, take care when encountering divisive issues and try to achieve broad-based support for proposed policies.