Introduction
The process of undertaking successful projects in an organization, especially in a healthcare setting or any research institution that offers healthcare services, requires a consideration of various factors because of the high-stakes nature of such projects. In other words, it is imperative to ensure that various factors, which can have a far-reaching impact on the outcomes of the project, are considered beforehand to guarantee success. This paper provides a general outline for the implementation of a new measurement system for servicing a research agenda.
The Outline
According to Proctor et al. (2011), the importance of the implementation phase of a project in an organization is recognized widely. This process entails many activities, which many organizations fail to handle properly. Consequently, the mismanagement ends up derailing the whole project. In this case, Proctor et al. (2011) propose eight factors that are critical to the success of the implementation process. These factors include correctness, espousal, aptness, feasibility, reliability, execution outlay, infiltration, and sustainability. Indeed, in the implementation process of the new measurement system for servicing the research agenda, which this paper seeks to discuss, the above eight factors will be central to the process (Durlak & DuPre, 2008).
Firstly, to implement the new measurement system, it is crucial to guarantee the acceptability of the new measurement system by all stakeholders of the organization (Proctor et al., 2011). In this case, there is the need to appreciate that people drive an organization and hence their consideration into the implementation of any new process or system, which can significantly change how they work. Acceptability implies a consensus on the stakeholders that the new measurement system is agreeable or satisfactory and hence relevant for what it is being implemented to accomplish (Proctor et al., 2011).
The lack of acceptability may affect the adoption of the new measurement system and hence failure to achieve the goals of the execution process. Ensuring acceptability requires the involvement and engagement of the stakeholders in the whole process to ensure a general appreciation of the importance and relevance of the new measurement system (Durlak & DuPre, 2008). For instance, to ensure involvement, it is imperative to undertake training on how the new measurement system works. The stakeholders have to be engaged in the whole implementation process.
Secondly, for the success of the implementation process, the stakeholders should adopt and incorporate the process into the organization (Proctor et al., 2011). In the case of the new measurement system, adoption indicates the use of the new system instead of the older one (O’Donnell, 2008). If no adoption is done, the implementation process cannot be termed as successful. Hence, the adoption phase calls for the need to ensure that the stakeholders, and most importantly those who are required to use the system, are aware of the functionality of the new system. Further, there is the need to have awareness of the advantages of the system over the previous systems. As such, according to Bianchi and Williams (2015), one of the most critical approaches that should be used in the implementation of the new system is the use of training and the close participation of the stakeholders for them to understand the usage of the new measurement system.
The third key tenet of consideration towards the successful implementation of a new measurement system is the appropriateness of the system to the organization’s current needs (Proctor et al., 2011). In this case, appropriateness differs from acceptability since it is possible to have an acceptable system, which is not in line with the organization’s goals and approaches. Consequently, appropriateness refers to the quality of being relevant and/or compatible with the given organization’s perception of the ability of the new system to meet its unique demands for such a system (Luchins, 2011).
With reference to the new measurement system, it is consequently crucial to ensure that the plan supports and advances the organization’s mission and goals. The new measurement system should also support the job requirements and skills that the main users of the method possess in line with the requirements of the job (Durlak & DuPre, 2008). Consequently, there is a need to ensure that the system is appropriate for the organization so that the implementation process can be successful.
Feasibility is a central factor in the success of a project in an organization. In this case, feasibility implies the extent to which the new measurement can be successfully used in support of the organization’s functions (Proctor et al., 2011). In this case, to ensure the success of the new measurement system, feasibility has to be guaranteed by availing enough resources and expertise to use the system in the organization (O’Donnell, 2008). For instance, resource allocation towards the support of a new system must be adequate. Hence, the training of stakeholders towards the usage and application of the system must also be appropriate. If an organization does not have the adequate resources of the required training for the use of the system, the implementation process is likely to be a failure, despite its appropriateness.
Fidelity is a vital success factor for the successful implementation of the new system (Proctor et al., 2011). Fidelity indicates the degree to which the implementation and adoption of the new measurement system follow the set guidelines and protocol for the system. Many times, implementation processes fail when there is inadequate support or follow-up on the implementation where deviation from the set procedures seriously affects the success of the process (Proctor et al., 2011). Consequently, to ensure that the new measurement system is successful, it will be crucial to maintain strict adherence to the set protocols by ensuring adequate reporting and review of the process at each stage.
The implementation cost is a key factor for consideration in the implementation process of any program or system. In other words, the implementers have to determine the actual cost of implementing the system in the organization (Proctor et al., 2011). They should also consider the long-term costs of running such a system or program (O’Donnell, 2008). In this case, the implementation of the new measurement system is within the organization’s financial capability. Hence, based on this factor, the implementation process will be successful.
On the other hand, penetration refers to the level of integration of a new measurement system to practice in the organization system. In this case, the new system must support or enhance the existing systems to ensure the success of the new measurement plan. Sustainability refers to the level at which a new system or program is maintained or institutionalized within a service or the organization’s activities (Proctor et al., 2011). Maintaining the sustainability of the system requires the establishment of periodical training for the stakeholders in relation to the use and application of the new system (Proctor et al., 2009). In this case, training on the support of the new measurement system will be set in specifically planned intervals such as twice annually while at the same time establishing support services in the first six months to ensure that all issues of concern are solved as soon as possible.
While the above steps are critical in ensuring the success of the implementation system, Luchins (2011) presents quality assurance as an essential factor for consideration for the new systems to continue to support the services that they are meant to provide in the end without comprising the quality of services. In this case, the implementation of the new measurement system requires the consideration of quality assurance approaches to guarantee quality reporting on the functionality of the system in both the short-term and the long run. Establishing quality measurement and improvement approaches will ensure that the measurement system can meet its expected goals.
Conclusion
In conclusion, ensuring the successful implementation of the new measurement system calls for consideration several key factors, which include acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability. Further, putting in place measures to ensure that quality is maintained in the end will result in the success of the system. Through the above approaches, it will be possible to have a triumphant implementation of the new measurement system in the organization. As the paper has revealed, there is a need for all stakeholders to participate in the implementation process so that they can be aware of the impact that the system will have on organizational performance.
Reference List
Bianchi, C., & Williams, D. (2015). Applying System Dynamics Modeling to Foster a Cause-and-Effect Perspective in Dealing with Behavioral Distortions Associated with a City’s Performance Measurement Programs. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(3), 395-425
Durlak, J., & DuPre, E. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American journal of community psychology, 41(3-4), 327-350.
Luchins, D. (2011). Demand characteristics and quality improvement: who is fooling whom? Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(2), 117-119.
O’Donnell, C. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K–12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 33-84.
Proctor, E., Landsverk, J., Aarons, G., Chambers, D., Glisson, C., & Mittman, B. (2009). Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36(1), 24-34.
Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., & Hensley, M. (2011). Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(2), 65-76.