Hi, my name is Jane Danforth. I work as an Involvement Officer for Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust. It’s a huge integrated mental health, learning disability and community health services organisation covering Local and Forensic services, Community Health services and Offender Healthcare. It’s my first time writing a blog on the Patient Opinion site. I hope you will find it interesting.

I’m really lucky to work in an organisation that supports an Involvement team with two Involvement Centres. It’s true to say I am blessed with great support from the top of our organisation; Professor Mike Cooke CBE (our CEO) my manager and also from Trust colleagues and Patient Opinion (PO)

How can I describe the PO team and what they offer to us? Well, for one, ‘real time’ feedback is starting to change the way we do things in the Trust. 2011 has been the best year for us yet. We were named as Pioneers of the Month for PO last year and we held the record for the fastest posting and response times of any Trust! We get Facebook and Twitter posts about us leading the way for patient feedback and it’s made my job so enjoyable. It has done our Trust the world of good and given us a platform to prove that our ‘Positive’ brand is not rhetoric and spin. PO has made a difference and offered value for money to the organisation. People say how much they like it and find it a great way to share how they feel about our services and what they would like to see get better.

Open and honest feedback sometimes means you have to take a deep breath and think hard about how you are going to respond to stories that are not always complimentary. The support of a great Communications Team makes all the difference. Julie Grant, Head of Communications is my sounding board and someone I can go to when challenges arise. Equally Sam Eagling, managing PALS and Complaints (Service Liaison) helps complete the circle of communication. I know that between us we can help to make things happen and people posting on the site get their voices heard. Things actually can change for the better and we have seen it happen ‘before our very eyes’!

I’m really pleased to say that the majority of our feedback is complimentary. I know staff get a real lift from postings that praise what they do and when we can’t always do what people ask, we can at least explain why some things are the way they are. I really believe it can stop people taking things further when issues arise and over next year we are going to try and evaluate this.

Our involvement volunteers take on many different roles. This year and in 2012 we will continue carrying the Olympic torch for PO.

Our PO Champions are making a difference using a ‘pass it on’ philosophy. Champions are made up of service users, carers, families and staff including Governors. For everyone they tell about PO they encourage others to tell someone else. Word of mouth is a powerful marketing tool, if you are good you can get always get better and positive feedback is a massive motivator. Equally when feedback is not good you have to listen and work together to resolve issues.

Next month I am going to tell you more about our iPad pilot. We launched a trial across the Trust in Local and Forensic services and believe me it’s been an exciting time! To be honest, It has increased my workload initially but it’s also given me such a buzz when I can see staff becoming responders and our youngest ever posting was from a 10 year old using our child and adolescent mental health services and in case you are wondering? Yes it was positive!

In January, we will be looking forward to the year ahead. My manager Paul Sanguinazzi, Head of Involvement, is keen that we really focus on getting a seamless reporting system that pulls together all our feedback in the Trust.

Other Trusts have started to ask me how we work with online feedback and I look forward to February 9th where we have been invited to speak at the regional PO event in Sheffield about how we have made it work for us in Nottinghamshire Healthcare.

And finally, I would like to share with you a letter of thanks that was given to me at the beginning of the week from a patient who was being discharged. This posting made my year: A letter of thanks for the staff on Ward B2

If you had to choose being able to see the name of the person who sent you an email or its title which would you choose? Well the evidence is pretty clear that most of us go for the person not the title. The messenger has always been more important than the message when it comes to getting stuff into our consciousness.

This is important when it comes to writing a good response on Patient Opinion (or any other social media platform). The more personal the responder is, the more feel they feel OK about being visible as the messenger, the easier it will for the reader to hear them. So here is a great response from Epsom and St Helier

We're glad your husband's injury wasn't serious and we'll pass your kind comments on to the team, including - importantly - the 'niggle' about having to give the full medical history twice. As you'd expect, there are procedures in place for staff to check and double-check some elements of a patient's medical history, but you shouldn't need to repeat the full history in such a short space of time.

It’s good because the writer has obviously read and appreciated the original story. And it’s written in a friendly style that makes you think there is someone pretty human at the back of it.

But it could be even better. For a start the author is simply ‘Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals’ which is about as impersonal is it gets. It would be great to know who it was who was saying this stuff – not just their job title but preferably their full name. And it would be even better if we could see what they looked like so its great when people add their photographs to responses just as Jane Danforth at Nottinghamshire Healthcare Trust does .  (it’s really easy for Patient Opinion subscribers  to upload a photo to personalise their responses).

And the worst kind of response that we see? Well that’s easy - it’s the cut and paste job from someone who doesn't appear to have even read the original posting and doesn’t give any details of themselves except their job title. Even worse is where every response from the organisation is identical so that anyone scrolling through a few can immediately see that the worst kind of ‘tick boxing’ is going on.

People are pretty savvy about user feedback nowadays. They are used to reading TripAdvisor and Amazon reviews. They know that some reviews will be from when the organisation – or maybe the author - was having a bad day. They read a few and come to their judgement. But the responses – well now that's real data direct from the horses mouth itself. So judgements may be quicker and harsher -  ‘Look at this - a cut and paste job for this posting that says terrible stuff happened? How heartless can these guys be?’

 On this reading the response to a posting – especially negative ones - may be more important in shaping the public’s perception of a trust than the critical story itself.

If you havn't yet seen it, our director James Munro wrote a great peice for The Guardian this morning. It's a gentle but optimistic warning about the problems the Government might encounter as they bring in a ratings system for care homes. Worth a read, even if we do say so ourselves.

James' peice for The Guardian - "Beware of the pitfalls of rating care homes" (15/12/2011)

"In times of change the learners will inherit the earth while the knowers will find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists."- Eric Hoffer