Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
191,078
result(s) for
"Organization Research."
Sort by:
Unconventional methodology in organization and management research
\"Most researchers in organization and management studies stick to two or three traditional research methods like surveys and interviews. Sticking with the familiar is seen as a safe bet, and innovation is discouraged by academic incentives and rewards. But research participants are now suffering from 'survey fatigue', and using the same old methods runs the risk of generating the same old findings. This book describes twelve unconventional methodologies in organization and management research. These include unconventional research settings and data sources, unconventional research designs and data collection methods, unconventional analytic approaches, and designs and methods that exploit new technology developments. The aim is to encourage dialogue and experimentation with regard to the development of innovative, unconventional approaches to organization and management research. Several commentators have criticized the way in which research methods have become more formulaic, and have argued for greater diversity in research approaches. The methodological perspective that the we adopt shapes our interpretation of the information that we gather. Different methods generate different kinds of information, leading to different ways of understanding the phenomena that we are investigating. Our methods influence our styles of theorizing, ways of thinking and reasoning, and forms of writing and reporting research. This book will be of value to academic researchers in organization and management studies, Doctoral candidates, and Masters students on MBA and similar programmes.\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
A Systematic Review of the Impact of Patient and Public Involvement on Service Users, Researchers and Communities
Objective
Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research has expanded nationally and internationally over the last decade, and recently there has been significant attention given to understanding its impact on research. Less attention has been given to the impact of PPI on the people involved, yet it has been shown that the success of PPI in research can be reliant on the processes of engagement between these individuals and communities. This paper therefore critically explores the impact of PPI on service users, researchers and communities involved in health and social care research.
Data Sources
Searches were undertaken from 1995 to April 2012 in the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane library, CINAHL, HMIC and HELMIS. Searches were undertaken for grey literature using the databases InvoNet and NHS Evidence.
Study Selection
Studies were included if they included the impact of PPI on individual service users, researchers or communities under research. Studies were excluded if they were in a foreign language (unless they were deemed critical to the systematic review) or were in children and adolescent services.
Study Appraisal
Data were extracted using a narrative synthesis, and quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme.
Main Results
Service users reported feeling empowered and valued, gaining confidence and life skills. Researchers developed a greater understanding and insight into their research area, gaining respect and a good rapport with the community. The community involved in research became more aware and knowledgeable about their condition. However, lack of preparation and training led some service users to feel unable to contribute to the research, while other service users and communities reported feeling overburdened with the work involved. Researchers reported difficulties in incorporating PPI in meaningful ways due to lack of money and time.
Conclusion
This is the first international systematic review to focus on the impact of PPI on the people involved in the process. The beneficial and challenging impacts reported highlight the importance of optimising the context and processes of involvement, so creating the potential for PPI to impact positively on the research itself.
Journal Article
Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews
Background
Billions of dollars are lost annually in health research that fails to create meaningful benefits for patients. Engaging in research co-design – the meaningful involvement of end-users in research – may help address this research waste. This rapid overview of reviews addressed three related questions, namely (1) what approaches to research co-design exist in health settings? (2) What activities do these research co-design approaches involve? (3) What do we know about the effectiveness of existing research co-design approaches? The review focused on the study planning phase of research, defined as the point up to which the research question and study design are finalised.
Methods
Reviews of research co-design were systematically identified using a rapid overview of reviews approach (PROSPERO: CRD42019123034). The search strategy encompassed three academic databases, three grey literature databases, and a hand-search of the journal
Research Involvement and Engagement
. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening and data extraction and resolved disagreements through discussion. Disputes were resolved through discussion with a senior author (PB). One reviewer performed quality assessment. The results were narratively synthesised.
Results
A total of 26 records (reporting on 23 reviews) met the inclusion criteria. Reviews varied widely in their application of ‘research co-design’ and their application contexts, scope and theoretical foci. The research co-design approaches identified involved interactions with end-users outside of study planning, such as recruitment and dissemination. Activities involved in research co-design included focus groups, interviews and surveys. The effectiveness of research co-design has rarely been evaluated empirically or experimentally; however, qualitative exploration has described the positive and negative outcomes associated with co-design. The research provided many recommendations for conducting research co-design, including training participating end-users in research skills, having regular communication between researchers and end-users, setting clear end-user expectations, and assigning set roles to all parties involved in co-design.
Conclusions
Research co-design appears to be widely used but seldom described or evaluated in detail. Though it has rarely been tested empirically or experimentally, existing research suggests that it can benefit researchers, practitioners, research processes and research outcomes. Realising the potential of research co-design may require the development of clearer and more consistent terminology, better reporting of the activities involved and better evaluation.
Journal Article
Community-based participatory research and integrated knowledge translation: advancing the co-creation of knowledge
Background
Better use of research evidence (one form of “knowledge”) in health systems requires partnerships between researchers and those who contend with the real-world needs and constraints of health systems. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) and integrated knowledge translation (IKT) are research approaches that emphasize the importance of creating partnerships between researchers and the people for whom the research is ultimately meant to be of use (“knowledge users”). There exist poor understandings of the ways in which these approaches converge and diverge. Better understanding of the similarities and differences between CBPR and IKT will enable researchers to use these approaches appropriately and to leverage best practices and knowledge from each. The co-creation of knowledge conveys promise of significant social impacts, and further understandings of how to engage and involve knowledge users in research are needed.
Main text
We examine the histories and traditions of CBPR and IKT, as well as their points of convergence and divergence. We critically evaluate the ways in which both have the potential to contribute to the development and integration of knowledge in health systems. As distinct research traditions, the underlying drivers and rationale for CBPR and IKT have similarities and differences across the areas of motivation, social location, and ethics; nevertheless, the practices of CBPR and IKT converge upon a common aim: the co-creation of knowledge that is the result of knowledge user and researcher expertise. We argue that while CBPR and IKT both have the potential to contribute evidence to implementation science and practices for collaborative research, clarity for the purpose of the research—social change or application—is a critical feature in the selection of an appropriate collaborative approach to build knowledge.
Conclusion
CBPR and IKT bring distinct strengths to a common aim: to foster democratic processes in the co-creation of knowledge. As research approaches, they create opportunities to challenge assumptions about for whom, how, and what is defined as knowledge, and to develop and integrate research findings into health systems. When used appropriately, CBPR and IKT both have the potential to contribute to and advance implementation science about the conduct of collaborative health systems research.
Journal Article
Research concepts for the practitioner of educational leadership
\"In Research Concepts for the Practitioner of Educational Leadership, the author acquaints the reader with principles of educational research that are most applicable to today's educational leaders. Educational leaders are facing increasing demands to analyze data and use research to make instructional decisions. School-based educational leaders are facing these demands as well as those in educational leadership at other levels such as school districts and foundations. Instructional leaders are finding it increasing difficult to lead without having a firm grasp of using data to make informed instructional decisions. This book helps to bridge the gap between the complex world of data analysis with the ever-changing dynamics of education leadership\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
An Intellectual History of School Leadership Practice and Research
An Intellectual History of School Leadership Practice and Research presents a detailed and critical account of the ideas that underpin the practice of educational leadership, through drawing on over 20 years of research into those who generate, popularise and use those ideas. It moves from abstracted accounts of knowledge claims based on studying field outputs, towards the biographies and practices of those actively involved in the production and use of field knowledge. The book presents a critical account of the ideas underpinning educational leadership, and engages with those ideas by examining the origins, development and use of conceptual frameworks and models of best practice. It deploys an original approach to the design and composition of an intellectual history, and as such it speaks to a wider audience of scholars who are interested in developing and deploying such approaches in their particular fields.
eBook
Identifying Research Trends and Gaps in the Context of COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the world in different ways. Not only are people’s lives and livelihoods affected, but the virus has also affected people’s lifestyles. In the research sector, there have been significant changes, and new research is coming very strongly in the related fields of virology and epidemiology. Similar trends were observed after the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) episodes of 2003 and 2012, respectively. Analyzing 20 years of published scientific papers, this article points out the highlights of coronavirus-related research. Significant progress is observed in the past research related to virology, epidemiology, infectious diseases among others. However, in research linked to public health, its governance, technology, and risk communication there seem to be gap areas. Although the World Health Organization (WHO) global research road map has identified social science-related research as a priority area, more focus needs to be given in the upcoming days for multi, cross and trans-disciplinary research related to public health and disaster risk reduction.
Journal Article