Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Conduct study
Analyze study data to yield results
Communicate the results as a neutral report to all stakeholders
Interpret the results and communicate the meaning of these to
stakeholders
Recommend actions for stakeholders to take
Suggest
to stakeholders
how to implement the recommend
ed
a
c
tions
Participate
as a change agent
in the implementation process
|
Æ
|
Æ
|
Æ
|
Æ
|
Æ
|
Æ
Viewing the aftermath of a study in this way is most important when a
study is conducted for a specific audience that needs to make decisions and
then take specific actions requiring careful planning, but it also can assist
the investigator when the intended consequences of the evaluation are less
clear.
Some evaluators—perhaps enthused by the clarity of their results and an
opportunity to use them to improve health care, biomedical research, or
education—prefer to go beyond reporting the results and conclusions to
making recommendations, and then helping the stakeholders to imple-
ment them. Figure 12.1 illustrates the dilemma often faced by evaluators
about whether to retain their scientific detachment and merely report the
study results—metaphorically leaving the “train” at the first or second
“stations”—or stay engaged somewhat longer. Evaluators who choose to
remain may become engaged in helping the stakeholders interpret what the
results mean, guiding them in reaching decisions and perhaps even in imple-
menting the actions decided upon. The longer they stay on the train, the
greater the extent to which evaluators must leave behind their scientific
detachment and take on a role more commonly associated with change
agents. Some confounding of these roles is inevitable when the evaluation
is performed by individuals within the organization developing the infor-
FIGURE 12.1. Scientific detachment or change agent: when to get off the train?
Search WWH ::
Custom Search