Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What Gets Noticed: How Barrier and Facilitator Perceptions Relate to the Adoption and Implementation of Innovative Mental Health Practices

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Community Mental Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This mixed-method study examined the facilitators and barriers discussed by 166 informants interviewed from 78 innovative mental health projects. Facilitator and barrier coding reflected two dimensions: the topic of the comment (e.g., funding); and the time phase of the issue’s influence (e.g., pre-decision). Proportions of facilitators to the sum of facilitator and barrier comments made by project informants were calculated. Overall, facilitator proportions were higher for projects that proceeded with implementation than those that did not adopt the practice. In addition, facilitator proportions were generally highest at pre-decision and lowest at full implementation for implementing projects.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barwick, M. A., Boydell, K. M., Stasiulis, E., Ferguson, H. B., Blasé, K., & Fixsen, D. (2005). Knowledge transfer and implementation of evidence-based practices in children’s mental health. Toronto, ON: Children’s Mental Health Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blasinsky, M., Goldman, H. H., & Unutzer, J. (2006). Project impact: A report on barriers and facilitators to sustainability. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 33, 718–729.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chiles, J. A., Miller, A. L., Crismon, M. L., Rush, A. J., Krasnoff, A. S., & Shon, S. S. (1999). The Texas medication algorithm project: Development and implementation of the schizophrenia algorithm. Psychiatric Services, 50, 69–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan, P. W., Steiner, L., McCracken, S. G., Blaser, B., & Barr, M. (2001). Strategies for disseminating evidence-based practices to staff who treat people with mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 52, 1598–1606.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (1987). The adoption of technological, administrative, and ancillary innovations: Impact of organizational factors. Journal of Management, 13, 675–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. The Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, R. E., Essock, S. M., Shaner, A., Carey, K. B., Minkoff, K., Kola, L., et al. (2001). Implementing dual diagnosis services for clients with severe mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 52, 469–476.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folkes, V. S. (1988). The availability heuristic and perceived risk. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glisson, C. (2002). The organizational context of children’s mental health services. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5, 233–253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, H. H., Ganju, V., Drake, R. E., Gorman, P., Hogan, M., Hyde, P. S., et al. (2001). Policy implications for implementing evidence-based practices. Psychiatric Services, 52, 1591–1597.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henggeler, S. W., Schoenwald, S. K., Borduin, C. M., Rowland, M. D., & Cunningham, P. B. (1998). Multisystemic treatment of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. (1979). Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem-solving groups: Concept, method and results. In L. R. Hoffman’s (Ed.), The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model (pp. 17–30). New York: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001). Implementing computer technology: An organizational analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 811–824.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994). Level issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19, 195–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of Management Review, 21, 1055–1080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, N., Stern, L. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1993). Conducting interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1633–1651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon, K. R., & Wehrung, D. A. (1986). Taking risks: The management of uncertainty. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. D., & Goes, J. B. (1988). Organizational assimilation of innovations: A multilevel contextual analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 897–923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, P. C. (2002). Why decisions fail. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panzano, P. C., & Roth, D. (2006). The decision to adopt evidence-based and other innovative mental health practices: Risky business? Psychiatric Services, 57, 1153–1161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Panzano, P. C., Roth, D., Crane-Ross, D., Massatti, R., Carstens, C., Seffrin B. A., & Chaney-Jones, S. (2005). The innovation diffusion and adoption research project (IDARP): Moving the diffusion of research results to promoting the adoption of evidence-based innovations in the Ohio mental health system. In D. Roth, & W. J. Lutz (Vol. 16, Eds.), New Research in mental health. Columbus, OH: Department of Mental Health.

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Repenning, N. P. (2002). A simulation-based approach to understanding the dynamics of innovation implementation. Organization Science, 13, 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenheck, R. A. (2001). Organizational process: A missing link between research and practice. Psychiatric Services, 52, 1607–1612.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizational research: multi-level and cross-level perspectives. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw’s (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 1–37). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, W. V., & Panzano, P. C. (2002). Identifying meaningful subgroups of adults with severe mental disabilities. Psychiatric Services, 53, 452–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seffrin, B. (2007). The views look different from over here. Innovation Diffusion and Adoption Research Project Documents, Bulletin Series. Office of Program Evaluation and Research, Ohio Department of Mental Health. http://www.mh.state.oh.us/oper/research/idarp/idarp.bulletin.3.pdf

  • Taylor, S. E. (1982). The availability bias in social perception and interaction. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky’s (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 190–208). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. E., Crocker, J., Fiske, S. T., Sprinzen, M., & Winkler, J. D. (1979). The generalizability of salience effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 357–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. In L. Berkowitz’s (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 249–288). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. B., & McDaniel, R. R., Jr. (1990). Interpreting strategic issues: Effects of strategy and the information-processing structure of top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 2, 286–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29, 28–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Surgeon General. (1999). Mental health: A report of the surgeon general. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by grant 1168 from the Ohio Department of Mental Health and by grant 00-65717-HCD from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Network on Mental Health Policy Research. The authors gratefully acknowledge the key contributions made by Emily Bunt, Rick Massatti and Helen Anne Sweeney and the dedication of other members of the research team who made this investigation possible, including: Dushka Crane-Ross, Carol Carstens, Sheri Chaney-Jones, Pud Baird, Vandana Vaidyanathan and Sheau-yuen Yeo. The authors appreciate three anonymous reviewers whose suggestions inspired a transformed and substantially improved manuscript. We are indebted to the organizational participants in the research who gave generously of their time.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Decision Support Services, Inc., 27 East Russell Street, Suite 302, Columbus, OH, 43215, USA

    Bev Seffrin & Phyllis C. Panzano

  2. Office of Program Evaluation and Research, Ohio Department of Mental Health, Columbus, OH, USA

    Dee Roth

Authors
  1. Bev Seffrin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Phyllis C. Panzano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dee Roth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bev Seffrin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seffrin, B., Panzano, P.C. & Roth, D. What Gets Noticed: How Barrier and Facilitator Perceptions Relate to the Adoption and Implementation of Innovative Mental Health Practices. Community Ment Health J 44, 475–484 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-008-9151-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-008-9151-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation