To foster bottom-up innovations, health care organizations are leveraging interdisciplinary frontline innovation teams. These teams include workers across hierarchical levels and professional backgrounds, pooling diverse knowledge sources to develop innovations that improve patient and worker experiences and care quality, equity, and costs. Yet, these frontline innovation teams experience barriers, such as time constraints, being new to innovation, and team-based role hierarchies. We investigated the practices that such teams in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) used to overcome these barriers. Our 20-month study of two FQHC innovation teams provides one of the first accounts of how practices that sustained worker engagement in innovation and supported their ideas to implementation evolve over time. We also show the varied quantity of engagement practices used at different stages of the innovation process. At a time when FQHCs face pressure to innovate amid staff shortages, our study provides recommendations to support their work.

Issue

When frontline employees' voice is not heard and their ideas are not implemented, patient care is negatively impacted, and frontline employees are more likely to experience burnout and less likely to engage in subsequent change efforts.

Critical theoretical analysis

Theory about what happens to voiced ideas during the critical stage after employees voice and before performance outcomes are measured is nascent. We draw on research from organizational behavior, human resource management, and health care management to develop a multilevel model encompassing practices and processes at the individual, team, managerial, and organizational levels that, together, provide a nuanced picture of how voiced ideas reach implementation.

Insight/advance

We offer a multilevel understanding of the practices and processes through which voice leads to implementation; illuminate the importance of thinking temporally about voice to better understand the complex dynamics required for voiced ideas to reach implementation; and highlight factors that help ideas reach implementation, including voicers' personal and interpersonal tactics with colleagues and managers, as well as senior leaders modeling and explaining norms and making voice-related processes and practices transparent.

Practice implications

Our model provides evidence-based strategies for bolstering rejected or ignored ideas, including how voicers (re)articulate ideas, whom they enlist to advance ideas, how they engage peers and managers to improve conditions for intentional experimentation, and how they take advantage of listening structures and other formal mechanisms for voice. Our model also highlights how senior leaders can make change processes and priorities explicit and transparent.

BACKGROUND: Engaging frontline clinicians and staff in quality improvement is a promising bottom-up approach to transforming primary care practices. This may be especially true in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) and similar safety-net settings where large-scale, top-down transformation efforts are often associated with declining worker morale and increasing burnout. Innovation contests, which decentralize problem-solving, can be used to involve frontline workers in idea generation and selection. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the ideas that frontline clinicians and staff suggested via organizational innovation contests in a national sample of 54 FQHCs. INTERVENTIONS: Innovation contests solicited ideas for improving care from all frontline workers-regardless of professional expertise, job title, and organizational tenure and excluding those in senior management-and offered opportunities to vote on ideas. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1,417 frontline workers across all participating FQHCs generated 2,271 improvement opportunities. APPROACHES: We performed a content analysis and organized the ideas into codes (e.g., standardization, workplace perks, new service, staff relationships, community development) and categories (e.g., operations, employees, patients). KEY RESULTS: Ideas from frontline workers in participating FQHCs called attention to standardization (n = 386, 17%), staffing (n = 244, 11%), patient experience (n = 223, 10%), staff training (n = 145, 6%), workplace perks (n = 142, 6%), compensation (n = 101, 5%), new service (n = 92, 4%), management-staff relationships (n = 82, 4%), and others. Voting results suggested that staffing resources, standardization, and patient communication were key issues among workers. CONCLUSIONS: Innovation contests generated numerous ideas for improvement from the frontline. It is likely that the issues described in this study have become even more salient today, as the COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating impacts on work environments and health/social needs of patients living in low-resourced communities. Continued work is needed to promote learning and information exchange about opportunities to improve and transform practices between policymakers, managers, and providers and staff at the frontlines.