My research
If I’m honest, this research did not come from me sitting down one day and trying to invent a clever topic. It came from practice. From what I have seen, what I have questioned and what has felt slightly off for a while.
I work in a healthcare environment where digital systems are now woven into almost everything we do. Patient records, communication platforms, monitoring systems, specialist apps, email, documentation, referrals, the list goes on. In theory, all of this should make care safer, quicker and better coordinated. In many ways it does. But it also creates a different kind of vulnerability, one that often sits quietly in the background until something goes wrong.
That is what drew me to this topic.
My research explores how a Cybersecurity Champion Model could strengthen cybersecurity awareness, engagement and resilience among NHS nurses. I am particularly interested in whether a peer led approach could work better than the usual top down style of training and compliance. On paper, mandatory cybersecurity education sounds sensible. In practice, it can easily become another tick box exercise that staff complete because they have to, not because it genuinely changes behaviour.
That tension matters to me.
I think one of the biggest problems in healthcare cybersecurity is that it is still too often framed as a technical issue rather than a clinical one. It tends to sit in the space of IT policy, system governance and organisational compliance while frontline staff are expected to follow rules that may not always reflect the reality of fast paced care. Nurses are regularly using digital systems under pressure, often while juggling urgent decisions, competing priorities and constant interruptions. In that environment, secure behaviour is not just about knowledge. It is also about time, culture, workflow and what feels realistic in the moment.
Get Olga Gladosz’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
That is why I am not especially interested in blaming individual staff for poor digital practice. That would be the lazy explanation. I am more interested in the conditions that shape behaviour in the first place. If nurses bypass security steps, share workarounds or treat cybersecurity as someone else’s responsibility, I do not think that automatically means they are careless. Sometimes it may point to something deeper like systems that are not aligned with clinical realities, training that feels disconnected from practice, or a culture where digital safety is discussed but not truly embedded.
This is where the idea of a Cybersecurity Champion becomes interesting.
The model I am exploring is based on the idea that peer influence may be more meaningful than repeated instruction from above. A nurse led champion role could help bridge the gap between policy and practice by making cybersecurity feel more relevant, more visible and more grounded in everyday care. Rather than presenting digital safety as an external demand, the role could support teams from within, through shared language, practical guidance and local credibility.
At the same time, I do not want to romanticise the idea. Just because something sounds good conceptually does not mean it will work well in practice. A champion model could easily fail if the role is vague, unsupported or quietly added onto somebody’s already overloaded working day. There is also a risk that organisations might treat it as a quick fix as though appointing one enthusiastic person can somehow solve wider cultural and structural problems. I do not think it is that simple.
That is one of the reasons this research matters to me. I am not trying to prove that the model is perfect. I am trying to explore whether it is viable, how it might be perceived by nurses and what barriers or enablers could influence its success. I want to understand whether it could genuinely support safer digital practice or whether it would simply become another well meaning idea that looks good in theory and struggles in real clinical life.
I am also aware that cybersecurity in healthcare is not an abstract concern. If digital systems are disrupted, delayed or compromised, the effects can reach far beyond the screen. Access to records can be affected. Communication can break down. Clinical decisions can be slowed. Patient trust can be damaged. So although the language of cybersecurity can sometimes sound technical and distant, the consequences are very human.
For me, that is what makes this research worth doing.
At its heart, this project is about more than systems and security. It is about culture, accountability and the realities of frontline nursing. It asks whether cybersecurity can be repositioned as part of safe patient care rather than something sitting awkwardly beside it. And it asks whether nurses, who are so often expected to adapt to digital change, could also have a more active role in shaping it.
I think that question is worth asking properly.
