Context for CMI 705 Assignment Example

The chosen organisation for this CMI 705 Assignment Example is the National Health Service (NHS) England, specifically focusing on the implementation of the Federated Data Platform (FDP). The NHS is a large-scale, public sector organisation providing comprehensive healthcare services across the United Kingdom. The FDP initiative represents a significant strategic change aimed at integrating disparate data systems across various NHS Trusts and Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) to improve patient outcomes, operational efficiency, and resource allocation.

This change is driven by the necessity to modernise digital infrastructure in response to increasing healthcare demands, technological advancements, and the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. As a strategic leader within the NHS England Digital Transformation team, You are responsible for overseeing the governance and stakeholder engagement aspects of this transition.

Learning Outcome 1: Understand the scope and context of strategic change

1.1 Discuss the scope, context and drivers for organisational change

The Scope of Strategic Change in NHS England

Strategic change within a complex ecosystem like the NHS is rarely isolated; it permeates multiple layers of the organisation. The scope of the Federated Data Platform (FDP) implementation is truly transformative, extending beyond simple technological upgrades to encompass strategic, operational, departmental, and people-centric dimensions (CMI, 2024). Strategically, the FDP aims to shift the NHS from a fragmented data landscape to a unified, data-driven culture that supports national health priorities.

Operationally, it involves standardising data collection and sharing protocols across hundreds of independent trusts. At the departmental and team levels, clinicians and administrators must adapt to new interfaces and workflows for elective recovery and care coordination. Crucially, the people-centric scope involves a massive shift in how staff perceive data security and collaborative working, necessitating significant cultural realignment (NHS England, 2024).

Organisational Context: The Public Sector Imperative

The context of this change is defined by the NHS’s status as a publicly funded, universal healthcare provider. Unlike private sector organisations driven primarily by profit, the NHS’s strategic direction is dictated by government policy, public accountability, and clinical excellence (Coetsee, 2025). The FDP must navigate a cross-boundary context, integrating data across local, regional (ICBs), and national levels. This complexity is further heightened by the varying digital maturity of different trusts, ranging from highly advanced digital hospitals to those still reliant on legacy paper systems. The political sensitivity of patient data privacy in the UK adds a layer of scrutiny that would be less pronounced in a private enterprise (Medact, 2026).

Drivers for Strategic Change

The necessity for the FDP is propelled by a combination of internal and external drivers that make the status quo unsustainable.

Internally, the necessity for the FDP is significantly propelled by the persistent elective recovery backlog, a critical issue exacerbated by the pandemic. Fragmented data systems have historically impeded efficient operating theatre scheduling and patient flow management, directly contributing to unprecedented waiting lists (NHS England, 2024). Furthermore, with escalating costs and limited staffing, there is an urgent internal imperative for ‘systems thinking’ to identify and implement more effective resource deployment strategies. The widespread digital fragmentation across the NHS, evidenced by the proliferation of over 200 different electronic patient record systems, has created pervasive ‘data silos,’ severely hindering clinical decision-making and compromising patient safety (Public Policy Projects, 2025). These internal pressures collectively underscore the critical need for a unified data platform.

Externally, the FDP is a direct response to overarching government policy and legislation, notably the UK Government’s 10-Year Health Plan and the Data Saves Lives strategy, both of which explicitly mandate a more integrated digital health environment (GOV.UK, 2022). Concurrently, rapid technological advancements, particularly in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Big Data analytics, present significant external opportunities to enhance predictive capabilities for disease outbreaks and enable personalised treatments.

However, these opportunities are contingent upon the existence of a unified data platform capable of leveraging such technologies effectively (Koparan, 2026). Public expectations and broader social influences also play a crucial role, as citizens increasingly anticipate seamless access to their health data by clinicians, irrespective of the care setting, reflecting the integrated digital experiences common in other sectors like banking. Finally, the prevailing economic pressures within the UK necessitate that public services demonstrate optimal value for money, thereby intensifying the drive for the efficiency gains that the FDP promises to deliver.

In summary, the FDP is not merely a software procurement project; it is a fundamental strategic realignment of the NHS’s operational core, driven by the dual pressures of post-pandemic recovery and the digital revolution.

1.2 Critically appraise the complexities of leading strategic change

Leading a change of the FDP’s magnitude within the NHS involves navigating a perfect storm of complexities that test the limits of strategic leadership. These complexities are not merely technical hurdles but represent a fundamental tension between innovation, public trust, and the preservation of a national institution’s core values.

Legal, Regulatory, and Data Governance Complexities: The Sovereignty Challenge

The most immediate and perhaps most daunting complexity is the legal and regulatory framework surrounding patient data. The NHS operates under the stringent requirements of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018. However, the FDP implementation introduces a novel layer of complexity due to its scale and the involvement of a private consortium led by Palantir Technologies. This has sparked intense legal scrutiny regarding data sovereignty – the principle that data should remain under the control of the NHS rather than the technology provider (Medact, 2026).

Strategic leaders must navigate the intricate “Duty of Confidentiality” alongside the Duty to Share information for direct care, a balance that is often legally ambiguous in large-scale data federations. The complexity is compounded by the requirement to manage National Data Opt-outs, where patients can choose to prevent their data from being used for research or planning. Ensuring that the FDP remains a viable tool for elective recovery while strictly adhering to these individual choices requires a level of “regulatory agility” that few public sector leaders have previously encountered.

Failure to manage this complexity doesn’t just risk a fine; it risks a judicial review that could halt the entire national programme (CMI, 2024). Furthermore, the cross-border nature of modern technology firms necessitates a deep understanding of international data transfer protocols, even if the data is hosted locally, as the support and development teams may be globally distributed. This creates a transparency paradox where leaders must explain highly technical data-handling processes to a lay public in a way that builds, rather than erodes, trust.

Cultural Resistance and the Preservation of Professional Autonomy Organisational culture within the NHS is not a monolith; it is a complex collection of sub-cultures ranging from surgical teams to administrative staff, each with its own set of values and norms (Schein, 1993). A primary complexity in leading the FDP change is the deep-seated value placed on clinical professional autonomy. Many clinicians perceive centralised data platforms as a Trojan horse for managerialism- a tool designed more for performance monitoring and top-down surveillance than for clinical benefit. This resistance is often rooted in a genuine fear that the computer says no will replace clinical intuition.

Critically, the prevailing culture of the NHS has historically been one of cautiousness and localism regarding data, often driven by a protective “fiefdom” mentality within individual trusts. Shifting this to a desired culture of radical transparency and collaborative, data-driven healthcare is a monumental task. Strategic leaders must navigate this by fostering psychological safety (Edmondson, 1999). This involves creating an environment where clinicians feel empowered to use the data to improve their practice without fear that the same data will be used punitively against them.

The complexity lies in the fact that culture cannot be installed like software; it must be nurtured through thousands of small interactions, peer-led advocacy, and the visible demonstration of clinical value. Leaders must be cultural architects, redesigning the social fabric of the organisation to embrace digital tools as an extension of, rather than a threat to, professional expertise.

Stakeholder Management in a Multi-Agency Environment

The stakeholder landscape for the FDP is exceptionally dense. It includes 1.4 million NHS staff, thousands of partner organisations, patient advocacy groups, and the general public. Managing these relationships requires more than simple communication; it requires stakeholder mapping that accounts for varying levels of influence and interest (NHS England, 2023). For example, the British Medical Association (BMA) and privacy groups like Foxglove represent powerful external stakeholders whose opposition can lead to judicial reviews or widespread public distrust. Leaders must balance these conflicting interests, often making difficult trade-offs between speed of implementation and the depth of consultation.

Resource Allocation and the “Double Running” Problem

Strategic change in healthcare faces the unique challenge of maintaining business as usual (BAU) while simultaneously building the future. The NHS cannot turn off for a weekend to upgrade its systems. This creates a resource complexity where staff are expected to learn new FDP workflows while managing record-breaking patient volumes. The financial investment in the FDP must be justified against competing clinical priorities, such as hiring more nurses or repairing crumbling hospital infrastructure. Leaders face the critical complexity of ensuring that the long-term benefits of the FDP do not come at the cost of short-term patient safety (CMI, 2024).

Risk Mitigation and Public Trust

Finally, the complexity of public trust cannot be overstated. Unlike a private company where a data breach might lead to a fine, a loss of trust in NHS data handling could lead to a mass withdrawal of public consent for data sharing, effectively crippling the FDP’s strategic value. Leaders must manage reputational risk by being radically transparent about how data is used and who has access to it. The complexity lies in the fact that trust is built slowly but destroyed instantly, requiring a leadership approach that prioritises ethics and transparency over mere technical efficiency.

1.3 Critically evaluate theories and models for leading and managing strategic change

To navigate the complexities of the FDP, leaders must apply and critically evaluate established change models, recognising that no single framework is a silver bullet.

Kotter’s Eight-Step Model: A Sequential Approach to NHS Change

Kotter’s (2012) model is particularly relevant for the FDP’s initial phases, where NHS England leadership successfully established a sense of urgency by highlighting the elective backlog and created a guiding coalition involving senior clinicians and digital leaders. The model is widely praised for its clear, actionable steps and its emphasis on leadership, communication, and employee engagement, effectively highlighting the importance of creating momentum and celebrating early successes.

However, its inherently top-down nature can prove problematic within the NHS, an organisation characterised by distributed authority and professional autonomy. The concept of a ‘volunteer army,’ for instance, often struggles to materialise when NHS staff are already operating under immense pressure and lack the capacity to ‘volunteer’ for additional change initiatives. Furthermore, the model’s linear progression does not readily accommodate the iterative and adaptive nature of digital transformation, where requirements frequently evolve based on user feedback and emergent challenges.

McKinsey 7S Framework: Holistic Alignment

The McKinsey 7S model (Singh, 2016) is essential for diagnosing why previous NHS data projects have often failed, frequently focusing on Hard S elements like Strategy and Systems while neglecting Soft S elements such as Staff, Skills, and Shared Values. The FDP’s success fundamentally depends on whether the skills of the workforce can effectively match the new systems. However, while the 7S model excels as a diagnostic tool, identifying what is misaligned, it offers limited prescriptive guidance on how to change deeply ingrained Shared Values within a 75-year-old institution that has traditionally exhibited a cautious, if not risk-averse, stance towards data sharing.

Lewin’s Three-Step Model and Force Field Analysis

Lewin’s (1947) Unfreeze-Change-Refreeze model provides a fundamental lens, with the ‘Unfreeze’ stage for the FDP involving a critical challenge to the status quo of siloed data. However, in a modern environment characterised by perpetual change, particularly within digital health, the Refreeze stage is often criticised as being obsolete (Coetsee, 2025). Contemporary organisations, including the NHS, require the development of ‘dynamic capabilities’ for continuous adaptation rather than a return to a static state.

In this context, Lewin’s Force Field Analysis offers a more immediately applicable tool for the FDP. It enables leaders to systematically identify both the ‘Restraining Forces,’ such as deep-seated privacy concerns and the inertia of legacy systems, and the Driving Forces, including urgent clinical needs and substantial government funding. By strategically focusing on weakening the restraining forces, rather than merely intensifying the driving forces, leaders can effectively reduce overall tension within the system and facilitate smoother change implementation.

Appreciative Inquiry (AI): A Strengths-Based Alternative

Given the high levels of burnout prevalent in the NHS, a purely problem-focused approach can be demoralising. Appreciative Inquiry (Cooperrider et al., 2014) offers a valuable alternative by focusing on what is working in trusts that already utilise data effectively. This approach can be highly effective in clinical settings where staff take pride in their work, allowing leaders to Discover best practices in data usage and collaboratively build a Dream of a data-integrated NHS that genuinely resonates with clinicians’ aspirations.

However, a critical limitation of AI is its potential insufficiency in addressing the Hard structural and legal problems, such as those associated with the Palantir contract, which often demand a more traditional, critical problem-solving approach rather than a purely strengths-based one.

In conclusion, the strategic leader at NHS England must be a theoretical pluralist, using Kotter to drive momentum, 7S to ensure alignment, and Force Field Analysis to navigate resistance, while using AI to maintain staff morale.

Learning Outcome 2: Know how to propose strategy for leading strategic change

2.1 Develop a proposal for leading strategic change

Synopsis of the Proposed Strategic Change: The NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP)

The proposed strategic change involves the nationwide implementation of the NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP). The FDP is a unified data infrastructure designed to connect disparate data sources across NHS Trusts and Integrated Care Boards (ICBs). Its primary purpose is to provide a single version of the truth for operational decision-making, elective recovery, and population health management. The change is not merely technical; it is a fundamental shift in the NHS’s operating model towards data-driven collaboration (NHS England, 2024).

Business Value and Anticipated Benefits

The FDP is expected to deliver substantial value across several domains.

Firstly, in elective recovery, by providing real-time visibility into operating theatre capacity and waiting lists, the FDP aims to reduce the national backlog by an estimated 10-15% within the first two years of full adoption.

Secondly, operational efficiency will be significantly enhanced as standardising data across trusts will reduce the administrative burden on clinical staff, thereby allowing more time for direct patient care.

Thirdly, improved patient outcomes are anticipated through enhanced data sharing between primary and secondary care, which will reduce medication errors and ensure clinicians have the most up-to-date information at the point of care.

Finally, resource optimisation will be achieved through better predictive analytics, enabling Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) to allocate staff and equipment more effectively during peak demand periods, such as winter pressures (Public Policy Projects, 2025).

Aims and Objectives: A Multi-Dimensional Framework

The proposal for the FDP is built upon a multi-dimensional framework of aims and objectives, designed to ensure that the change delivers tangible benefits while remaining strategically aligned with national health priorities.

The primary aim is to establish a secure, integrated, and scalable national data infrastructure that empowers NHS clinicians and operational leaders to deliver more efficient, equitable, and effective healthcare through real-time, data-driven decision-making. This overarching aim is supported by several Strategic Objectives (SMART).

Firstly, regarding system integration, the goal is to successfully onboard 100% of NHS Acute Trusts and all 42 Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) to the FDP’s core Elective Recovery and Care Coordination modules by December 2025, thereby ensuring a comprehensive national data footprint.

Secondly, for operational efficiency, the objective is to achieve a measurable 20% reduction in the ‘administrative time spent on manual data reconciliation’ for surgical theatre staff within 12 months of implementation at each trust, directly addressing staff burnout and resource optimisation.

Thirdly, in terms of clinical impact, the aim is to facilitate a 10% improvement in theatre utilisation rates across participating trusts by June 2026, leveraging the FDP’s predictive scheduling tools, which is a critical Key Performance Indicator for elective recovery.

Fourthly, concerning public trust and governance, the objective is to maintain a 100% compliance rate with the National Data Guardian’s standards, ensuring zero ‘high-risk’ data breaches attributable to FDP central governance during the first three years of operation.

Finally, for professional development, the goal is to ensure that 90% of targeted clinical and administrative users complete the FDP Digital Proficiency training programme within three months of their trust’s go-live date, directly addressing the Skills element of the McKinsey 7S framework. By setting these specific targets, the proposal moves from a vague technological ambition to a rigorous, accountable strategic initiative that can be monitored and evaluated at every stage of its lifecycle.

Strategic Alignment and Compliance

The FDP is perfectly aligned with the NHS Long Term Plan and the Government’s Digital Health and Social Care Plan (GOV.UK, 2022), directly supporting the strategic goal of integration between health and social care.

Compliance is ensured through several critical dimensions: legally and regulatorily, the FDP adheres to the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, with oversight provided by the National Data Guardian; ethically, the implementation embraces the Data Saves Lives framework, ensuring transparency in data usage and fostering public trust; and from an HR and professional standpoint, the FDP aligns with the ‘NHS People Plan,’ committing to provide staff with the necessary digital skills and tools to succeed in a data-driven healthcare environment.

Tools and Techniques for Delivery

The delivery of the FDP will employ a hybrid project management approach, strategically combining methodologies to leverage their respective strengths. Agile methodology will be utilised for the iterative development of specific FDP modules, such as the Elective Recovery module, thereby allowing for rapid feedback loops from clinical beta-testers and continuous adaptation.

Concurrently, PRINCE2 governance will be applied for the overall national programme management, ensuring clear accountability, robust risk management, and structured stage-gate approvals (NHS England, 2023). Furthermore, a comprehensive stakeholder mapping exercise, utilising tools like the Power/Interest Matrix, will be crucial to tailor engagement strategies for diverse groups, ranging from highly influential bodies like the British Medical Association (BMA) to the general public, who, despite lower individual power, possess significant collective influence.

Risk Identification and Mitigation

Risk identification and mitigation are paramount for the FDP’s successful deployment. A primary risk is the potential loss of public trust, which will be mitigated through radical transparency regarding the Palantir contract and the implementation of a robust ‘data opt-out’ mechanism.

Another significant risk is low clinical adoption, which will be addressed by appointing Chief Clinical Information Officers (CCIOs) as dedicated change agents within every trust, tasked with demonstrating the tangible clinical value of the platform. Furthermore, to counter potential technical interoperability issues, a phased roll-out strategy will be employed, coupled with intensive technical support specifically tailored for trusts with lower digital maturity.

Communication Strategy

The strategy will be multi-channel and two-way. It includes national public awareness campaigns, monthly webinars for NHS staff, and a dedicated FDP Feedback Portal where clinicians can suggest improvements. The core message focuses on Data for Care, emphasising that the FDP is a tool for clinicians, not a surveillance mechanism for managers.

2.2 Reflect on how approaches to leadership can be applied to deliver the strategy for change

Delivering the FDP requires a situational fluency in leadership, where different approaches are applied at different stages of the change lifecycle.

Transformational Leadership for Vision and Inspiration

In the early stages, Transformational Leadership (Bass & Riggio, 2006) is essential. Leaders must articulate a compelling vision of a digitally empowered NHS that resonates with the core values of clinical staff. By focusing on how the FDP will ultimately help patients, transformational leaders can inspire staff to look beyond the short-term disruption of the implementation. This approach is vital for overcoming the change fatigue prevalent in the post-pandemic NHS.

Authentic Leadership for Building Trust

Given the controversies surrounding data privacy and the Palantir contract, Authentic Leadership (Goffee & Jones, 2014) is perhaps the most critical requirement. Leaders must be transparent about the challenges, acknowledge the valid concerns of privacy advocates, and demonstrate a genuine commitment to data ethics. An authentic leader in this context does not dismiss criticism but engages with it honestly. This builds the moral capital necessary to maintain public and professional trust.

Situational Leadership for Practical Implementation

As the FDP moves into the roll-out phase, Situational Leadership (Hersey & Blanchard, 1988) becomes paramount. Different NHS trusts have vastly different levels of readiness for the FDP. A telling or directing style may be necessary for trusts with low digital maturity that need clear, step-by-step guidance. Conversely, a delegating or empowering style is appropriate for digitally advanced trusts that can innovate on top of the FDP platform. Leaders must be adept at assessing trust readiness and adjusting their support accordingly.

Servant Leadership for Supporting the Frontline

The FDP will only succeed if it makes the lives of frontline staff easier. Servant Leadership (Greenleaf, 1970) shifts the focus from what the staff can do for the project” to what the project can do for the staff. Leaders must act as blocker-removers, ensuring that clinicians have the time, training, and hardware they need to use the FDP effectively. By prioritising the needs of the users, servant leaders can foster a sense of ownership and reduce resistance.

Entrepreneurial Leadership for Innovation

The FDP is not a static product; it is a platform for future innovation. Entrepreneurial Leadership (Roebuck, 2017) is needed to encourage trusts to develop their own apps or use-cases for the data. This involves taking calculated risks and fostering a culture of experimentation, which can be challenging in a traditionally risk-averse public sector environment.

Monitoring Outcomes and Overcoming Resistance

Effective leadership in the FDP context involves constant monitoring of both Hard and Soft outcomes. Hard outcomes like theatre utilisation rates are easy to track via the platform itself. However, Soft outcomes like staff sentiment and perceived clinical value require qualitative monitoring through surveys and focus groups.

Overcoming resistance requires a nuanced approach. Instead of viewing resistance as a negative force to be crushed, leaders should view it as valuable feedback. For example, if clinicians resist a particular data entry screen, it may be because the UI is poorly designed, not because they oppose the FDP itself. By listening to and acting on this resistance, leaders can improve the platform and build stronger commitment (CMI, 2024).

Synthesis and Final Reflection: The Strategic Leader as an Ethical Navigator

The delivery of the NHS Federated Data Platform represents one of the most significant strategic changes in the history of the UK’s public sector. It is a transformation that sits at the intersection of technological possibility and human vulnerability. As this reflection has demonstrated, the successful implementation of such a change is not a matter of technical brilliance alone; it is fundamentally a leadership challenge that requires a sophisticated, multi-dimensional approach.

Ultimately, the success of the FDP rests on the Ethical Leadership of those at the helm (Mendonca & Kanungo, 2008). In a public sector context, and particularly within the sacred space of healthcare, the ends of efficiency and recovery do not always justify the means if those means involve a compromise of public trust or clinical integrity. The FDP must be delivered in a way that is not only legally compliant and technically robust but also ethically sound and professionally respectful. This requires leaders who are willing to be ethical navigators, steering the organisation through the choppy waters of public scrutiny, political pressure, and professional skepticism.

By synthesizing the visionary inspiration of a transformational leader, the unshakeable integrity of an authentic leader, and the humble support of a servant leader, the NHS can navigate the profound complexities of this transition. The strategic leader must be a theoretical pluralist, comfortable with the structured discipline of Kotter and PRINCE2, while remaining open to the iterative, emergent learning of Agile and Appreciative Inquiry.

In doing so, the NHS will not just install a platform; it will cultivate a new, data-integrated culture that ensures the sustainability of universal healthcare for generations to come. The FDP is not the destination; it is the infrastructure for a journey towards a more equitable, efficient, and compassionate healthcare system. The strategic leader’s role is to ensure that, in the rush towards a digital future, the NHS never loses sight of its human-centric past.

References for CMI 705 Assignment Example

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

CMI. (2024). Level 7 Strategic Management and Leadership Practice Syllabus V2-2. Chartered Management Institute.

Coetsee, W. J. (2025). Rethinking Change Management: A Critical Overview. [online] Google Books. Available at: https://books.google.com/books?id=xgmhEQAAQBAJ [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

Cooperrider, D. L., Srivastava, S., Bushe, G. R., & et al. (2014). Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Approach to Building a Better Future. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2014). The Character of a Corporation: How Your Company’s Culture Can Make or Break Your Business. Profile Books.

Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership That Gets Results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78-90.

GOV.UK. (2022). A plan for digital health and social care. [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-plan-for-digital-health-and-social-care/a-plan-for-digital-health-and-social-care [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The Servant as Leader. Robert K. Greenleaf Center.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1988). Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. 5th ed. Prentice Hall.

House, R. J. (1992). Charismatic Leadership. In M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership Theory and Research: Perspectives and Directions (pp. 81-107). Academic Press.

Koparan, E. (2026). Change Management as a Driver of Long-Term Organizational Viability. In: Bridging Traditional Theory and Emerging Corporate Realities. IGI Global.

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading Change. Harvard Business Review Press.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). The Leadership Challenge. Jossey-Bass.

Lewin, K. (1944). Forces Behind Food Habits and Methods of Change. National Research Council.

Lewin, K. (1946). Action Research and Minority Problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-46.

Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in Group Dynamics: Concept, Method and Reality in Social Science; Social Equilibria and Social Change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41.

Medact. (2026). Briefing: Concerns Regarding Palantir Technologies and NHS Data. [online] Available at: https://www.medact.org/2026/resources/briefings/briefing-palantir-fdp/ [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

Mendonca, M., & Kanungo, R. N. (2008). Ethical Leadership. Open University Press.

NHS England. (2023). Stakeholder analysis – aqua.nhs.uk. [online] Available at: https://aqua.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/qsir-stakeholder-analysis.pdf [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

NHS England. (2024). NHS Federated Data Platform uptake and benefits. [online] Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/digitaltechnology/nhs-federated-data-platform/impact/fdp-uptake-and-benefits/ [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

Oswick, C. (2008). Radical Change within Traditional Structures. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 21(2), 159-165.

Public Policy Projects. (2025). Maximising the impact of the NHS Federated Data Platform. [online] Available at: https://publicpolicyprojects.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Maiximising-the-impact-of-the-NHS-Federated-Data-Platform.pdf [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

Roebuck, C. (2017). Entrepreneurial Leadership. [online] Available at: https://www.managers.org.uk [Accessed 6 Jun. 2026].

Schein, E. H. (1993). On the Dynamics of Organizational Culture. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 6(2), 23-33.

Singh, S. (2016). A Study of Role of McKinsey’s 7S Framework in Achieving Organizational Excellence. Organization Development Journal, 34(6), 37-43.