Over the past 5-10 years, there have been many services developing, with growing confidence, as a PIE. In the 'build back better' spirit of 2021, some are now looking to how the same PIE approach or 'philosophy' might pervade ( be 'embedded') across the whole organisation - from Top to Toe, as we have put it, in the current community of practice forums.

One question we in the Pizazz team would like to ask is: can we help? How suitable - if at all - is the Pizazz, to operate at committee or SMT level? Or is there more work we might need to do, to make it suitable?

The five stage cycle of the Pizazz process should - at least in principle - hold good, at committee, SMT and Board level. That is:

1. How do we think we are doing, as a PIE at SMT/Board level? - What's our initial 'assessment'?
2. Why do we say that? - What's the 'evidence'?
3. What holds us back, what could take us forward? - What's the 'diagnosis'?
4. What can we do about these? - What's our action plan?
5. How does this look to someone else (that we trust to share it with)? - What does peer review tell us?

The PIEs 2 framework was intended and designed to be 'customisable'. So there may well need to be some modifications - customisations - of the framework, to suit this new level of application. It may be simply a shift in the language; or it may need to be more radical. But let's look at what initial translation we might start with.

Psychological/emotional awareness: Are our meetings just about managerial and governance issues? Do we need to be more open about ourselves, as people? How important are constructive relationships between us all? What do we think 'makes people tick' in the services we are creating and managing?

Training and support: Is there training and support for committee members? Do we make enough time and room for. induction, for learning from the workforce and the 'service users'?

Learning and Enquiry: How genuinely reflective are we? Do we create a culture of enquiry amongst ourselves about issues we must address, rather than a culture of adherence, and in services, a culture of blame? How open are we to feedback, to sharing and learning from others? (This is surely the heart of what good governance should be about!)

Spaces of opportunity: It's not so clear what this might mean at committee level!

The Three Rs:  How involved do we mean to be in day-to-day management of the service, rather than in setting strategic direction? (This is where the boundaries between governance and management can easily be problematic.) Is delegation working effectively, and do specialist roles around the committee table suit the demands of the work?

These and doubtless may other questions might arise in applying the PIE approach and specifically the Pizazz at committee/Board/SMT level. Would it (final question?) be useful to have a discussion, perhaps an on-going discussion, as a Special Interest Group, to tease out more, and learn, together?

Roll out and 'top to toe embedding' : HERE

Corporate social responsibility : HERE

A single framework : HERE

360 degree appraisal : HERE

Customising the PIE Abacus : HERE

A one-bead Abacus : HERE

The Pizazz on paper

The Pizazz on paper (summary sheets) :  HERE

The Pizazz Handbook, 'Useful questions' : HERE

A Pizazz assessment facilitators' crib sheet : HERE

Creative Commons licence terms :  HERE

Customising the PIEs 2.0 framework: HERE

The PIE Abacus

The PIE Abacus - an online Pizazz :  HERE

Text and video briefings for PIE leads : HERE

THE PIE Abacus; the simple, effective way to develop your services as PIEs : HERE

(from Daniel O'Brien on Vimeo.)