A brief pause before the day begins

What we found in the news

AHRQ’s TeamSTEPPS guide to team briefs (opens in a new tab), created in May 2023 and reviewed that December, describes a short discussion about the plan, team responsibilities and available resources. Its checklist includes a wonderfully practical question:

“What is staff and provider availability throughout the shift?”

— AHRQ, Sharing the Care Plan: Brief, checklist

This is established professional guidance, rather than a trial of our suggestions below. We are revisiting it because the beginning of a day is a good time to find out whether everyone is working from the same assumptions.

Why this matters to us

Consider an illustrative morning at a community day program. Transport is bringing one participant later than usual. A visiting practitioner has changed their arrival time. The staff member who normally welcomes new participants is covering another room.

Each change is manageable. Together, they could leave someone waiting without knowing who will help.

At genus, we are interested in the work that makes a day feel joined up. Often that starts before the first activity: colleagues noticing which ordinary arrangements need attention and agreeing who will handle them. A meeting earns its place when it helps people get on with the day.

Start with what is different today

A useful brief does not need to repeat everything in the care record. Ask what has changed, which arrangement is uncertain and who needs to know before their work begins.

For the late arrival, the team might agree who will welcome the participant and offer a choice of how to join the morning. The person's preference matters. They may want a quiet introduction, or they may prefer to go straight to an activity they already know.

Bring only the relevant information into the discussion, through the team's approved process. Some details belong in a private conversation with the responsible practitioner, rather than a group briefing.

Managers can make the purpose clearer by distinguishing three kinds of contribution: an update colleagues need, a question that needs an answer, and a decision someone must make. The brief can identify the owner of a longer conversation without becoming that conversation.

A visible clock can help, although speed is not the whole test. If someone cannot raise an important concern because the agenda is too tight, the team needs another reliable way to hear it.

Make availability specific

A person's name on a roster does not explain when they can help. They may be off site, supporting someone privately or covering a different service.

Discuss the points in the day when the usual contact will be unavailable. Who has agreed to cover? Can they do the work being handed over? How will colleagues reach them?

In our illustrative program, the welcome role needs a real colleague who has accepted it. A general instruction to help out leaves the work floating between people.

Availability includes access to the resources the team expects to use. A room may be booked, transport may be delayed or an interpreter may need to be arranged. Discovering that early gives people a chance to adapt. It does not guarantee that every gap can be filled.

Notice whether the brief helped

Try reviewing a small number of ordinary days with the team. Which question still interrupted people later? Did the same unresolved arrangement appear again? Did someone receiving support have to repeat information that staff could have passed on appropriately?

Invite those observations without treating every interruption as a failure. People's needs change during a day. The aim is to distinguish a new situation from a question the team could reasonably have settled earlier.

If the brief becomes a list read aloud by one person, ask whose useful knowledge is missing. New colleagues, transport staff and people doing the welcome may notice different things.

The genus connection

Today, configured genus care-team tools can help staff review recorded activities and observations before deciding what belongs in the day's work. Available community calendars and tasks can also support agreed arrangements.

These tools depend on the modules, permissions and workflows an organization uses. They do not establish that a colleague is available or has accepted an action. That agreement still needs to happen between people.

We see a useful role for technology in making relevant context easier to find, so the brief can spend less time searching and more time deciding.

One question to take away

What is one assumption about today's availability that your team would benefit from checking before the day begins?