Readiness, outcomes, and roles.

Thanks to the vision and constant grinding of Dr. Janet Durbin of CAMH, we have empirical support that readiness differs depending on the role and level of leadership in an organization.

That’s it. No need to bury the lede!

Okay, here’s a bit more

For a while, we had some challenges with readiness research. Recall that we here at the Dawn Chorus Group (and in our previous organizational affiliations) are into formative evaluation. We like to use data to improve as we gather information that may prove beneficial.

This is great in many cases but does stymie the more “rigorous” research. This is because readiness data may be confounded by any interventions to improve it.

However, our friends up north were able to gather both readiness data and fidelity data! This is huge. The main finding was the differences between levels, specifically around motivation. We have almost always run up against, but never had the empirical evidence for.

But now we can say the obvious….”hey, frontline staff and leadership may look at the innovation a bit differently!” This reinforces the need to sample broadly. We already had a hunch about this, as I’ve said. In ReSOLV, we get lots of data across roles and people. And yes, we’ve seen differences (though that data is years, or maybe just months? away from primetime).

Check out the full article below

But wait, there’s more!

In the very near future (like 2 weeks or so), we’ll finally be getting off the ground. You want readiness assessments? You want community-based machine learning paradigms.

Oh boy, are you in for a treat…