Is the Concept of Self-Regulation Useful for Supporting Effective Implementation in Community Settings?

Abstract

The literature and utility of self-regulation extends beyond individuals; a critical factor for successful and sustainable implementation of evidence-based programs in a community setting may be the capacity of teams to self-regulate implementation processes. The conceptual foundation of this proposal is explored and definitions of the five dimensions of self-regulation for implementation processes are provided. Practice examples illustrate how the provision of external implementation support to build self-regulatory capacity among implementation teams adopting and scaling-up EBPs in the local community setting has shaped and refined the proposed definitions to better reflect the work on-the-ground. The role of external implementation support providers in developing implementation team self-regulation is explored and practice strategies to promote self-regulation are provided. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Proctor et al. (2011) for a full discussion of implementation outcomes including intervention adoption, fidelity, reach, and sustainment and others (Meyers et al. 2012; Waltz et al. 2015; Aldridge et al. 2016a; Metz and Bartley 2012) for examples of effective strategies, capacities, and practices to achieve those outcomes.

References

  1. Aarons, G. A., Hurlburt, M., & Horwitz, S. M. (2011). Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 38(1), 4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aldridge, W. A., Boothroyd, I. I., Fleming, R. I., Jarboe, W. O. L., Morrow, K., Ritchie, J., G. F., et al (2016a). Transforming community prevention systems for sustained impact: Embedding active implementation and scaling functions. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 6(1), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-015-0351-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Aldridge, W. A., Murray, I. I., Prinz, D. W., R. J., & Veazey, C. A. (2016b). Final report and recommendations: The Triple P implementation evaluation, Cabarrus and Mecklenburg counties, NC. Chapel Hill: Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bandura, A., & Jourden, F. J. (1991). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing the impact of social comparison on complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, L. D., Feinberg, M. E., & Greenberg, M. T. (2010). Determinants of community coalition ability to support evidence-based programs. Prevention Science, 11(3), 287–297.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Butterfoss, F., & Kegler, M. C. (2002). Toward a comprehensive understanding of community coalitions: Moving from practice to theory. In R. DiClemente, R. Crosby & M. C. Kegler (Eds.), Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research: Strategies for improving public health. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chamberlain, P., Brown, C. H., & Saldana, L. (2011). Observational measure of implementation progress in community based settings: The stages of Implementation Completion (SIC). Implementation Science, 6, 116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chinman, M., Acosta, J., Ebener, P., et al. (2012). Establishing and evaluating the key functions of an interactive systems framework using an assets-getting to outcomes intervention. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(3), 295–310.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Denison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management Review, 21(3), 619–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. DiDonato, N. C. (2013). Effective self-and co-regulation in collaborative learning groups: An analysis of how students regulate problem solving of authentic interdisciplinary tasks. Instructional Science, 41(1), 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dunst, C. J., & Trivette, C. M. (2012). Moderators of the effectiveness of adult learning method practices. Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 143–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Eccles, M. P., & Mittman, B. S. (2006). Welcome to implementation science. Implementation Science. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fixsen, D., Blase, K., Metz, A., & Van Dyke, M. (2013). Statewide implementation of evidence-based programs. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 213–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Timbers, G. D., & Wolf, M. M. (2001). In search of program implementation: 792 replications of the Teaching-Family Model. In G. A. Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington & A. W. Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation in practice: Implementing and evaluating effective programs (pp. 149–166). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Heifetz, R. A., & Laurie, D. L. (1997). The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 124–134.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Higgins, M., Weiner, J., & Young, L. (2012). Implementation teams: A new lever for organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 366–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., Malmberg, J., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). Exploring socially shared regulation in the context of collaboration. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 12(3), 267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kanfer, F. H. (1986). Implications of a self-regulation model of therapy for treatment of addictive behaviors. In W. R. Miller & N. Heather (Eds.), Treating addictive behaviors (pp. 29–47). Boston, MA: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Karoly, P. (1993). Mechanisms of self-regulation: A systems view. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 23–52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.44.1.23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lasker, R. D., & Weiss, E. S. (2003). Creating partnership synergy: The critical role of community stakeholders. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 26(1), 119–139.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Self-regulation through goal setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 212–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

  26. McWilliam, J., & Brown, J. (2012). Adapting implementation science to create an experience-informed implementation framework—The TPI implementation framework. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Implementation Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  27. McWilliam, J., Brown, J., Sanders, M. R., & Jones, L. (2016). The Triple P implementation framework: The role of purveyors in the implementation and sustainability of evidence-based programs. Prevention Science, 17(5), 636–645.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Metz, A., & Bartley, L. (2012). Active implementation frameworks for program success. Zero to Three, 32(4), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Meyers, D. C., Durlak, J. A., & Wandersman, A. (2012). The Quality Implementation Framework: A synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(3–4), 462–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9522-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Panadero, E., & Järvelä, S. (2015). Socially shared regulation of learning: A review. European Psychologist, 20(3), 190–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., et al. (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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Saldana, L., & Chamberlain, P. (2012). Supporting implementation: The role of community development teams to build infrastructure. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(3–4), 334–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9503-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Sanders, M. R. (2008). Triple P—Positive Parenting Program as a public health approach to strengthening parenting. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(4), 506–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.22.3.506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sanders, M. R., & Mazzucchelli, T. G. (2013). The promotion of self-regulation through parenting interventions. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 16(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-013-0129-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Spoth, R., & Greenberg, M. (2011). Impact challenges in community science-with-practice: Lessons from PROSPER on transformative practitioner-scientist partnerships and prevention infrastructure development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 48(1), 106–119.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Waltz, T. J., Powell, B. J., Matthieu, M. M., Damschroder, L. J., Chinman, M. J., Smith, J. L., et al. (2015). Use of concept mapping to characterize relationships among implementation strategies and assess their feasibility and importance: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study. Implementation Science, 10(1), 109. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0295-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Nonnan., R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., et al. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 171–181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca H. Roppolo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Jenna McWilliam is an employee of Triple P International Pty Ltd. All other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roppolo, R.H., McWilliam, J., Aldridge, W.A. et al. Is the Concept of Self-Regulation Useful for Supporting Effective Implementation in Community Settings?. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 22, 118–128 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-019-00286-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Implementation
  • Self-regulation
  • Implementation teams
  • Scale-up
  • Evidence-based practice