Theories of Organizational Change and Technology Transfer

  • Faye S. Taxman
  • Steven Belenko
Part of the Springer Series on Evidence-Based Crime Policy book series (SSEBCP)


How do you change organizations, systems, or work processes? This key question by researchers and practitioners involves the theories of organizational change and the key components of the change process. Over the last 2 decades, a number of frameworks have been articulated that focus on the important ingredients in the change process. In this chapter, these frameworks are described and the key components of change models are identified. The concept of Technology Transfer is defined as a tool to import innovation into an organization, regardless of the size or shape of the organization. Beginning with Everett Rogers and culminating in recent advances in developing frameworks for change models, we detail the different models and their core components.


Technology Transfer Substance Abuse Treatment Addiction Treatment Organizational Climate Total Quality Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aarons, G., Wells, R., Zagursky, K., Fettes, D., & Palinkas, L. (2009). Implementing evidence-based practice in community mental health agencies: A multiple stakeholder analysis. American Journal of Public Health, 99(11), 2087–2095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ash, J. (1997). Organizational factors that influence information technology diffusion in academic health sciences centers. Journal of the American Informatics Association, 4, 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Backer, T. E. (1993). Information alchemy: Transforming information through knowledge utilization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44, 217–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bero, L. A., Grilli, R., Grimshaw, J. M., Harvey, E., Oxman, A. D., & Thomson, M. A. (1998). Closing the gap between research and practice: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. British Medical Journal, 317, 465–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhattacharyya, O., Reeves, S., Garfinkel, S., & Zwarenstein, M. (2006). Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions: Fine in theory, but evidence of effectiveness in practice is needed. Implementation Science, 1, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brach, C., Lenfestey, N., Roussel, A., Amoozegar, J., & Sorenson, A. (2008). Will it work here? A decisionmaker’s guide to adopting innovations. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Retrieved August 22, 2011 from Scholar
  7. Brown, B. S., & Flynn, P. M. (2002). The federal role in drug abuse technology transfer: A history and perspective. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burke, L. A., & Hutchins, H. M. (2007). Training transfer: An integrative literature review. Human Resource Development Review, 6(3), 263–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burrell, W., & Gelb, A. (2007). You get what you measure: Compstat for community corrections. Washington: The Pew Charitable Trusts.Google Scholar
  10. Damschroder, L., Aron, D., Keith, R., Kirsh, S., Alexander, J., & Lowery, J. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4(1), 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001). Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 685–716. doi:10.2307/3094828.Google Scholar
  12. Eliason, M. (2003). Evidence based practices: An implementation guide for community based substance abuse treatment agencies. Iowa City: The Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation.Google Scholar
  13. Feldstein, A. C., & Glasgow, R. E. (2008). A Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 34(4), 228–243.Google Scholar
  14. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).Google Scholar
  15. Ford, J. H., II, Green, C. A., Hoffman, K. A., Wisdom, J. P., Riley, K. J., Bergmann, L., et al. (2007). Process improvement needs in substance abuse treatment: Admissions walk-through results. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 33(4), 379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frambach, R. T., & Schillewaert, N. (2002). Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 163–176. doi:16/S0148-2963(00)00152-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garnick, D. W., Horgan, C. M., Lee, M. T., Panas, L., Ritter, G. A., Davis, S., et al. (2007). Are Washington Circle performance measures associated with decreased criminal activity following treatment? Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 33(4), 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glisson, C., Dukes, D., & Green, P. (2006). The effects of the ARC organizational intervention on caseworker turnover, climate, and culture in children’s service systems. Child Abuse & Neglect, 30(8), 855–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glisson, C., Landsverk, J., Schoenwald, S., Kelleher, K., Hoagwood, K. E., Mayberg, S., & Green, P. (2008). Assessing the organizational social context (OSC) of mental health services: implications for research and practice. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 35(1–2), 98–113. doi:10.1007/s10488-007-0148-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glisson, C., & Schoenwald, S. K. (2005). The ARC organizational and community intervention strategy for implementing evidence-based children’s mental health treatments. Mental Health Services Research, 7(4), 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goldstein, I. (1997). Training in organizations. New York: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  22. Gosling, A. S., Westbrook, J. I., & Coiera, E. W. (2003). Variation in the use of online clinical evidence: A qualitative analysis. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 69, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Graham, I. D., & Logan, J. (2004). Innovations in knowledge transfer and continuity of care. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 36(2), 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grol, R., Wensing, M., & Eccles, M. (2005). Improving patient care: The implementation of change in clinical practice. Waltham, MA: Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grol, R. P. T. M., Bosch, M. C., Hulscher, M. E. J. L., Eccles, M. P., & Wensing, M. (2007). Planning and studying improvement in patient care: The use of theoretical perspectives. Milbank Quarterly, 85(1), 93–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Helfrich, C., Damschroder, L., Hagedorn, H., Daggett, G., Sahay, A., Ritchie, M., et al. (2010). A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework. Implementation Science, 5(1), 82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Henderson, C. E., Taxman, F. S., & Young, D. W. (2008). A Rasch model analysis of evidence-based treatment practices used in the criminal justice system. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 93(1–2), 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hoffman, P. B., & Beck, J. (1976). Salient factor score validation: A 1972 release cohort. Journal of Criminal Justice, 4, 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kilbourne, A. M., Neumann, M. S., Pincus, H. A., Bauer, M. S., & Stall, R. (2007). Implementing evidence-based interventions in health care: application of the replicating effective programs framework. Implementation Science, 2(1), 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kitson, A., Ahmed, L. B., Harvey, G., Seers, K., & Thompson, D. R. (1996). From research to practice: one organizational model for promoting research – based practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 23(3), 430–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001). Implementing computerized technology: An organizational analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 811–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of Management Review, 21, 1055–1080.Google Scholar
  34. Knudsen, H. K., Ducharme, L. J., & Roman, P. M. (2006). Early adoption of buprenorphine in substance abuse treatment centers: Data from the private and public sectors. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 30(4), 363–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Knudsen, H. K., & Roman, P. M. (2002). Modeling the use of innovations in private treatment organizations: The role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 26, 353–361.Google Scholar
  36. Kochevar, L. K., & Yano, E. M. (2006). Understanding health care organization needs and context. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(S2), S25–S29.Google Scholar
  37. Lamb, S. J., Greenlick, M. R., & McCarty, D. M. (1998). Bridging the gap between practice and research: Forging partnerships with community-based drug and alcohol treatment. Washington: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  38. Leeman, J., Baernholdt, M., & Sandelowski, M. (2007). Developing a theory – based taxonomy of methods for implementing change in practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(2), 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lehman, W. E., Greener, J. M., & Simpson, D. D. (2002). Assessing organizational readiness for change. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liddle, H. A., Rowe, C. L., Gonzalez, A., Henderson, C. E., Dakof, G. A., & Greenbaum, P. E. (2006). Changing provider practices, program environment, and improving outcomes by transporting multidimensional family therapy to adolescent drug treatment setting. The American Journal on Addictions, 15, 102–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lukas, C. V., Holmes, S. K., Cohen, A. B., Restuccia, J., Cramer, I. E., Shwartz, M., & Charns, M. P. (2007). Transformational change in health care systems: an organizational model. Health Care Management Review, 32(4), 309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McCarty, D., Fuller, B. E., Arfken, C., Miller, M., Nunes, E. V., Edmundson, E., et al. (2007). Direct care workers in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network: Characteristics, opinions, and beliefs. Psychiatric Services, 58(2), 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McCarty, D., Fuller, B., Kaskutas, L. A., Wendt, W. W., Nunes, E. V., Miller, M., et al. (2008). Treatment programs in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 92(1–3), 200–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McCarty, D., Rieckmann, T., Green, C., Gallon, S., & Knudsen, J. (2004). Training rural practitioners to use buprenorphine: Using The Change Book to facilitate technology transfer. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 26(3), 203–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mendel, P., Meredith, L. S., Schoenbaum, M., Sherbourne, C. D., & Wells, K. B. (2007). Interventions in organizational and community context: A framework for building evidence on dissemination and implementation in health services research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 35(1–2), 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mowbray, C. T., Holter, M. C., Teague, G. B., & Bybee, D. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 315–340.Google Scholar
  47. Patton, M. Q. (1996). A world larger than formative and summative. American Journal of Evaluation, 17(2), 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Patton, M. Q. (2003). Utilization-focused evaluation. In T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (Vol. 1, pp. 223–244). Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pettigrew, A., & Whipp, R. (1992). Managing change and corporate performance. In K. Cool, D. J. Neven, & I. Walter (Eds.), European industrial restructuring in the 1990s. New York, NY: New York University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Proctor, E. K., & Rosen, A. (2008). From knowledge production to implementation: Research challenges and imperatives. Research on Social Work Practice, 18(4), 285–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., et al. (2010). 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.Google Scholar
  53. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  54. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  55. Rycroft-Malone, J., Harvey, G., Kitson, A., McCormack, B., Seers, K., & Titchen, A. (2002). Getting evidence into practice: ingredients for change. Nursing Standard, 16(37), 38–43.Google Scholar
  56. Schoenwald, S. K., & Hoagwood, K. (2001). Effectiveness, transportability, and dissemination of interventions: What matters when? Psychiatric Services, 52, 1190–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shortell, S. M. (2004). Increasing value: A research agenda for addressing the managerial and organizational challenges facing health care delivery in the United States. Medical Care Research and Review, 61(3 suppl), 12S–30S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Simpson, D. D. (2002). A conceptual framework for transferring research to practice. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Simpson, D. D., & Dansereau, D. F. (2007). Assessing organizational functioning as a step toward innovation. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 3(2), 20–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Spouse, J. (2001). Bridging theory and practice in the supervisory relationship: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 33(4), 512–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stetler, C. B. (2001). Updating the Stetler Model of research utilization to facilitate evidence-based practice. Nursing Outlook, 49(6), 272–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stetler, C., Ritchie, J., Rycroft-Malone, J., Schultz, A., & Charns, M. (2009). Institutionalizing evidence-based practice: An organizational case study using a model of strategic change. Implementation Science, 4(1), 78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Taxman, F. S. (1998). Reducing recidivism through a seamless system of care: Components of effective treatment, supervision, and transition services in the community. Washington: Office of National Drug Control Policy.Google Scholar
  64. Taxman, F. S., & Bouffard, J. A. (2000). The importance of systems issues in improving offender outcomes: Critical elements of treatment integrity. Justice Research and Policy, 2, 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Taxman, F. S., Perdoni, M., & Harrison, L. D. (2007). Drug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 32, 239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Taylor, F. W. (1911). Scientific management. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  67. Walsh, W. F. (2001). Compstat: An analysis of an emerging police managerial paradigm. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 24, 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wilson, P., Petticrew, M., Calnan, M., & Nazareth, I. (2010). Disseminating research findings: What should researchers do? A systematic scoping review of conceptual frameworks. Implementation Science, 5(1), 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Criminology, Law and SocietyGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  2. 2.Department of Criminal JusticeTemple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations