industry & reform
Championing reform
Reform in the aged care
sector is a given. The question
is, who will lead it?
By Rebecca Wilson
T
he reputation of the aged care sector and individual
providers will inevitably be damaged by the evidence
presented at the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality
and Safety, which started on 11 February.
The sector faces significant reform, which has already been
flagged, but the reputational damage to individual organisations
will rest on their commitment to change before that change
is defined. Providers that approach the commission and its
outcomes with honesty, transparency and a focus on solutions
before they are imposed can influence the future of an industry
that is yet to align with consumer expectations.
THE PROBLEM
Given the aged care industry has generally deployed a strategy
of avoidance to mitigate risk, the question is whether providers
are adequately prepared for the conduct and aftermath of the
royal commission. This inquiry will be more brutal than the
banking royal commission as the vulnerability of Australia’s elderly
and the inadequacies of the industry are laid bare. The fallout
will be far worse because of the emotive nature of aged care and
the almost universal community directly linked to an aged care
experience through family, friend or self.
No provider will escape the impact of the commission, and
business and personal reputations will be at stake.
18 agedcareinsite.com.au
Journalists will be reporting in real time, just as they did at the
banking royal commission.
Social media was the genesis of the wave of family discontent
that led to the aged care royal commission, and it will again
play a disproportionate role in the fury the inquiry will reveal.
Families and residents will find the courage to speak up, spurred
on by the personal stories that will lead this inquiry, creating a
contagion force.
Providers need to consider potential risks not just in terms of
known clinical shortcomings but also where a misalignment in
expectations has created an issue. The public’s expectation of the
care environment can be at odds with the palliative nature of aged
care and the experience of people at the bedside.
An argument of clinical adherence or expected clinical
consequences will fail to turn the tide of public opinion and serve
only to fuel the growing sentiment of a sector that has lost touch
with its purpose.
Provider-led change is the only defence that has the power to
influence consumer opinion and contribute to a positive future
state. Providers need to show they care and are not only willing
but already enforcing change, even where the clinical evidence is
on their side.
And while there are likely to be many positive stories that
providers will want to share, they should remember the terms of
the royal commission are about calling out the industry’s failings
and misconduct. Telling a good story could backfire unless
it is organically led by residents and families. That potentially
exists, because the reputation of the aged care sector is also
one that has been skewed. There are hundreds of stories of
exceptional care and there will be a time and place to ensure
these are heard.
How each provider responds to all of this could temper the
extent of reputational, operational and commercial damage.