A Mixed Methods Examination of Decision-Making During Program Exploration and Implementation in Schools.

Schools are a critical setting to promote healthy youth development through the provision of evidence-based programs (EBPs), yet preventive EBPs in schools are underutilized. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework highlights numerous factors that may influence program adoption during the Exploration phase and progress monitoring during the Implementation phase. However, no research has systematically and simultaneously identified the factors that influence school administrators' decision-making during these important processes. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 school administrators in the Midwestern region of the U.S. to understand how they weigh various considerations that inform their adoption and progress monitoring of prevention programs. Results indicated that school administrators consider five separate factors during the adoption decision, prioritized in the following order: need for the program, school community buy-in, contextual fit, resources, and program characteristics (including the evidence-base). Further, administrators consider five indicators to monitor program performance, prioritized as follows: intervention fidelity, quantitative and qualitative data that determine if the identified need was met, school community buy-in, resource consumption, and program characteristics. Implications for prevention scientists and suggestions for future research are discussed.

From microbe to metaphor: virus-like problems in organizations.

Despite the important role of problem-solving in organizations, our understanding of the fundamental nature of problems is limited. To generate insights and discussion on this topic, we introduce the metaphor of a "virus-like" problem, which is a special kind of problem that often escapes the awareness of organizational leaders. Virus-like problems differ from other problems in organizations because, just like actual viruses, they are hidden, their source is difficult to identify, and they can quickly spread to others. Integrating the public health and organizational psychology fields, we draw lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic and how it was (mis) managed by public officials to offer a new perspective on problems in organizations and offer practical ideas for how leaders can address virus-like problems of their own.

Sticking with Programs That Do Not Work: The Role of Escalation of Commitment in Schools.

Schools are the most common site to implement evidence-based prevention programs and practices (EBPs) to improve behavioral and mental health outcomes among children and adolescents. Research has highlighted the critical role of school administrators in the adoption, implementation, and evaluation of such EBPs, focusing on the factors they should consider during the adoption decision and the behaviors needed for successful implementation. However, scholars have only recently begun to focus on the de-adoption or de-implementation of low-value programs and practices to make room for evidence-based alternatives. This study introduces escalation of commitment as a theoretical framework for understanding why school administrators may stick with ineffective programs and practices. Escalation of commitment is a robust decision-making bias in which people feel compelled to continue with a course of action even when performance indicators suggest it is not going well. Using grounded theory methodology, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 building- and district-level school administrators in the Midwestern United States. Results suggested that escalation of commitment occurs when administrators attribute the underlying causes of poor program performance not to the program itself but instead to issues related to implementation, leadership, or the limitations of the performance indicators themselves. We also identified a variety of psychological, organizational, and external determinants that accentuate administrators' continuance of ineffective prevention programs. Based on our findings, we highlight several contributions to theory and practice.

Coordinated action in multiteam systems.

This study investigated coordinated action in multiteam systems employing 233 correspondent systems, comprising 3 highly specialized 6-person teams, that were engaged in an exercise that was simultaneously "laboratory-like" and "field-like." It enriches multiteam system theory through the combination of theoretical perspectives from the team and the large organization literatures, underscores the differential impact of large size and modular organization by specialization, and demonstrates that conventional wisdom regarding effective coordination in traditional teams and large organizations does not always transfer to multiteam systems. We empirically show that coordination enacted across team boundaries at the component team level can be detrimental to performance and that coordinated actions enacted by component team boundary spanners and system leadership positively impact system performance only when these actions are centered around the component team most critical to addressing the demands of the task environment.