Great question. There is definitely a potential for these to work together!
PSIRF is all about getting away from an approach to incident management that emphasises investigating and responding to every incident but instead focusing on whether we are learning anything from incidents and thinking about tackling common issues in a more systematic way.
A QMS is all about making sure we have clear definitions for what good looks like in terms of how we deliver our services and places a lot of emphasis on ensuring that we have well documented ways of working that have a robust monitoring and improvement process around them.
The main opportunities, as I see it, are to ensure that learning from PSIRF is used to inform and update the way our processes are designed and then using the compliance monitoring data to help us understand how well we have adopted and embedded this learning into everyday practice.
There are a lot of people having discussions around how best to align these systems at the moment so would be interested to hear from anyone that feels like they have managed to align them.

We’re pulled together a whole series of standards together into one framework, which we are piloting. Will keep you posted on how we get on

As always Jem you are too kind. Once I have some degree of confidence that it’s improving outcomes I may use of the QMS forum that you so eloquently chair to showcase the framework in more detail and facilitate a wider discussion as to its application and how we may improve it.