PLEASE NOTE: When you click 'Reply' to any message it will be sent to all RAMESES List members. If you only want to reply to the sender please remove [log in to unmask] from the 'To:' section of your email.
Dear Paul,
You've presented a nice example and a good question about rivalry emerging in the analysis. The answer to your question lies in improving the articulation of the context-mechanism interaction and in using "retroductive" thinking. Here are a few pointers for improving the CMO configuration:
First, in your CMO configuration you have included the terms: "project manager", "organizational trainer and coach" and "programme manager." Are these referring to the same person or different people? Consistency and accuracy is very important here.
Second your description of 'context' and 'intervention' is rather similar, if not synonymous. You may amalgamate these statements and put them under 'intervention' and leave the context box open for understanding how the background environment of the organization or personal preferences/pre-dispositions of practitioners (etc.) interact with the intervention mechanisms. Is it the case for example, that in practices with heavy caseloads or for those who deal with severe, emergency type mental health crises are more (or less?) open to the intervention resources? Are junior clinicians more open than senior or vice versa? What is it about the context that makes a difference?
Third, the first statement in your 'resource' box is very good. The second statement about 'leadership' can be unpacked further. What is it about leadership? Is it co-productive mentorship? is there a surveillance aspect? These are examples of mechanism resources that dig a bit deeper than the concept of 'leadership'. Are there consequences to non-uptake of the resource or is it simply voluntary? These are also resources. Does the programme manager have authority over the practitioners, as many leaders do? Your use of the term 'leadership' doesn't reveal these kinds of details. This is what 'retroductive thinking' means and through the process your questions will be resolved. Then you can either choose to have separate CMO configurations showing the differences, or else include the rivalry within one CMOc table - it doesn't really matter. Decide based on what is the most clear for your readership. The CMO configuration is a heuristic which means that you use it to optimize your retroductive thinking, however that may be.
Keep working on unpacking concepts and improving the clarity of the context-mechanism interaction and you will be successful.
sincerely,
Justin
PLEASE NOTE: When you click 'Reply' to any message it will be sent to all RAMESES List members. If you only want to reply to the sender please remove [log in to unmask] from the 'To:' section of your email.
|
Context |
Intervention |
Resource |
Reasoning / Response |
Outcome |
|
Project Manager employed by a Local Health District to train and support mental health practitioners integrate person-centred care planning into community-based, clinical treatment
|
Dedicated organisational trainer and coach available to MH practitioners and managers |
MH professionals have the opportunity to access timely, work-based support and guidance in the use of the strengths model tools
Program manager provides leadership in the change management process |
Practitioners value the support provided and remain committed to developing their practice
Increased confidence in the commitment of the organisation to implement strengths-based practice.
|
Practitioners develop increased competency in the use of the model
Engagement in sustained efforts to integrate the strengths model tools in practice.
|