"Would you like to explore structured governance models that integrate compliance with optimized efficiency?" ... not really; but that is a useful list for "younger viewers".
I am not a great fan of the "Rules-Based International Order", "Globalisation" ... or even the "Settled Science" (surely a contradiction in terms), either; no surprises there, then.
But I like COSSH, by the way. It probably needs updating.
"All Medical devices are critical" ... not so; especially in the (many cases) where replacements are close at hand.
Regarding the "blended approach" (is that similar to the "blended families" I hear abour?) ... well, that was back then (and far away); it was more like "needs must" I would say. We did our best, supported the medical and nursing staff, got the kit going again, and never killed anyone (as far as I am aware).
I should imagine that not only are the Greybeard and Magee maintenance profiles country miles apart, but (probably more importantly in the Real World) separated by great distance financially! And I already know that younger folk are not much interested in the "history" outside of the NHS anyway.
But rest assured that I agree with the bits in your final paragraph about unproductive but instrusive "managers". In my time I have had two goes at working as an Agency Tech at various NHS hospitals. The first period was in the early 90's ... the second ten and more years later. There were definitely more occasions of folk "interrupting my work" during the latter period.
Lastly, my own interest in the variations of this-and-that approaches to equipment PM, is that I endeavour to include as many sensible options as seems reasonable in my software; which is still aimed at those biomeds that, despite now usually having access to the internet, may still be struggling out there in other parts of the world. After all, computers and "governance" are all very well (perhaps), but they still don't fix the kit.
