Cargando…
Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research
BACKGROUND: Even under optimal internal organizational conditions, implementation can be undermined by changes in organizations’ external environments, such as fluctuations in funding, adjustments in contracting practices, new technology, new legislation, changes in clinical practice guidelines and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427584/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28499408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0592-x |
_version_ | 1783235659156160512 |
---|---|
author | Birken, Sarah A. Bunger, Alicia C. Powell, Byron J. Turner, Kea Clary, Alecia S. Klaman, Stacey L. Yu, Yan Whitaker, Daniel J. Self, Shannon R. Rostad, Whitney L. Chatham, Jenelle R. Shanley Kirk, M. Alexis Shea, Christopher M. Haines, Emily Weiner, Bryan J. |
author_facet | Birken, Sarah A. Bunger, Alicia C. Powell, Byron J. Turner, Kea Clary, Alecia S. Klaman, Stacey L. Yu, Yan Whitaker, Daniel J. Self, Shannon R. Rostad, Whitney L. Chatham, Jenelle R. Shanley Kirk, M. Alexis Shea, Christopher M. Haines, Emily Weiner, Bryan J. |
author_sort | Birken, Sarah A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Even under optimal internal organizational conditions, implementation can be undermined by changes in organizations’ external environments, such as fluctuations in funding, adjustments in contracting practices, new technology, new legislation, changes in clinical practice guidelines and recommendations, or other environmental shifts. Internal organizational conditions are increasingly reflected in implementation frameworks, but nuanced explanations of how organizations’ external environments influence implementation success are lacking in implementation research. Organizational theories offer implementation researchers a host of existing, highly relevant, and heretofore largely untapped explanations of the complex interaction between organizations and their environment. In this paper, we demonstrate the utility of organizational theories for implementation research. DISCUSSION: We applied four well-known organizational theories (institutional theory, transaction cost economics, contingency theories, and resource dependency theory) to published descriptions of efforts to implement SafeCare, an evidence-based practice for preventing child abuse and neglect. Transaction cost economics theory explained how frequent, uncertain processes for contracting for SafeCare may have generated inefficiencies and thus compromised implementation among private child welfare organizations. Institutional theory explained how child welfare systems may have been motivated to implement SafeCare because doing so aligned with expectations of key stakeholders within child welfare systems’ professional communities. Contingency theories explained how efforts such as interagency collaborative teams promoted SafeCare implementation by facilitating adaptation to child welfare agencies’ internal and external contexts. Resource dependency theory (RDT) explained how interagency relationships, supported by contracts, memoranda of understanding, and negotiations, facilitated SafeCare implementation by balancing autonomy and dependence on funding agencies and SafeCare developers. SUMMARY: In addition to the retrospective application of organizational theories demonstrated above, we advocate for the proactive use of organizational theories to design implementation research. For example, implementation strategies should be selected to minimize transaction costs, promote and maintain congruence between organizations’ dynamic internal and external contexts over time, and simultaneously attend to organizations’ financial needs while preserving their autonomy. We describe implications of applying organizational theory in implementation research for implementation strategies, the evaluation of implementation efforts, measurement, research design, theory, and practice. We also offer guidance to implementation researchers for applying organizational theory. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5427584 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54275842017-05-15 Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research Birken, Sarah A. Bunger, Alicia C. Powell, Byron J. Turner, Kea Clary, Alecia S. Klaman, Stacey L. Yu, Yan Whitaker, Daniel J. Self, Shannon R. Rostad, Whitney L. Chatham, Jenelle R. Shanley Kirk, M. Alexis Shea, Christopher M. Haines, Emily Weiner, Bryan J. Implement Sci Debate BACKGROUND: Even under optimal internal organizational conditions, implementation can be undermined by changes in organizations’ external environments, such as fluctuations in funding, adjustments in contracting practices, new technology, new legislation, changes in clinical practice guidelines and recommendations, or other environmental shifts. Internal organizational conditions are increasingly reflected in implementation frameworks, but nuanced explanations of how organizations’ external environments influence implementation success are lacking in implementation research. Organizational theories offer implementation researchers a host of existing, highly relevant, and heretofore largely untapped explanations of the complex interaction between organizations and their environment. In this paper, we demonstrate the utility of organizational theories for implementation research. DISCUSSION: We applied four well-known organizational theories (institutional theory, transaction cost economics, contingency theories, and resource dependency theory) to published descriptions of efforts to implement SafeCare, an evidence-based practice for preventing child abuse and neglect. Transaction cost economics theory explained how frequent, uncertain processes for contracting for SafeCare may have generated inefficiencies and thus compromised implementation among private child welfare organizations. Institutional theory explained how child welfare systems may have been motivated to implement SafeCare because doing so aligned with expectations of key stakeholders within child welfare systems’ professional communities. Contingency theories explained how efforts such as interagency collaborative teams promoted SafeCare implementation by facilitating adaptation to child welfare agencies’ internal and external contexts. Resource dependency theory (RDT) explained how interagency relationships, supported by contracts, memoranda of understanding, and negotiations, facilitated SafeCare implementation by balancing autonomy and dependence on funding agencies and SafeCare developers. SUMMARY: In addition to the retrospective application of organizational theories demonstrated above, we advocate for the proactive use of organizational theories to design implementation research. For example, implementation strategies should be selected to minimize transaction costs, promote and maintain congruence between organizations’ dynamic internal and external contexts over time, and simultaneously attend to organizations’ financial needs while preserving their autonomy. We describe implications of applying organizational theory in implementation research for implementation strategies, the evaluation of implementation efforts, measurement, research design, theory, and practice. We also offer guidance to implementation researchers for applying organizational theory. BioMed Central 2017-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5427584/ /pubmed/28499408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0592-x Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Debate Birken, Sarah A. Bunger, Alicia C. Powell, Byron J. Turner, Kea Clary, Alecia S. Klaman, Stacey L. Yu, Yan Whitaker, Daniel J. Self, Shannon R. Rostad, Whitney L. Chatham, Jenelle R. Shanley Kirk, M. Alexis Shea, Christopher M. Haines, Emily Weiner, Bryan J. Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
title | Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
title_full | Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
title_fullStr | Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
title_full_unstemmed | Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
title_short | Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
title_sort | organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427584/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28499408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0592-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT birkensaraha organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT bungeraliciac organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT powellbyronj organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT turnerkea organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT claryalecias organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT klamanstaceyl organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT yuyan organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT whitakerdanielj organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT selfshannonr organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT rostadwhitneyl organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT chathamjenellershanley organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT kirkmalexis organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT sheachristopherm organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT hainesemily organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch AT weinerbryanj organizationaltheoryfordisseminationandimplementationresearch |