What the initial problem was thought to be
We think we need a specialist credentialling system for Speech Pathologists in Australia.
What the problems turned out to be
SPA did not have a clear understanding of the type of problems a (specialist) credentialling system might address.
Working backwards, using international and national credentialling models, research evidence and stakeholder data, four problems were identified that credentialling could address:
Problem 1 – Speech Pathology does not have formal, external recognition from policy makers and third party funders for particular clinical areas of practice.
Problem 2 – Individuals and communities do not have access to / are unaware of some (more specialised) speech pathology services.
Problem 3 – Speech pathologists do not have a way to be recognised for clinical expertise.
Problem 4 – Speech pathologists do not have clear, clinical specialty career pathways.
What the end result was
Four evidence-informed models of specialist credentialling were presented to the board using four IF-THEN statements.
For example: IF the problem is X THEN the solution (in this case each credentialing model) should look like Y (and here are the mechanisms that will enable this to be successful).
Each statement was supplemented with detailed implementation mechanisms required for success of each model and a summary of evidence to understand potential impact.
The board came to an understanding of the different problems that credentialing beyond entry level practice could address and the inputs required to make each different model impactful. They and used this understanding to determine the future course of action for the organisation.