↓ Skip to main content

Why (we think) facilitation works: insights from organizational learning theory

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
41 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
177 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
307 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Why (we think) facilitation works: insights from organizational learning theory
Published in
Implementation Science, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0323-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Whitney Berta, Lisa Cranley, James W. Dearing, Elizabeth J. Dogherty, Janet E. Squires, Carole A. Estabrooks

Abstract

Facilitation is a guided interactional process that has been popularized in health care. Its popularity arises from its potential to support uptake and application of scientific knowledge that stands to improve clinical and managerial decision-making, practice, and ultimately patient outcomes and organizational performance. While this popular concept has garnered attention in health services research, we know that both the content of facilitation and its impact on knowledge implementation vary. The basis of this variation is poorly understood, and understanding is hampered by a lack of conceptual clarity. In this paper, we argue that our understanding of facilitation and its effects is limited in part by a lack of clear theoretical grounding. We propose a theoretical home for facilitation in organizational learning theory. Referring to extant literature on facilitation and drawing on theoretical literature, we discuss the features of facilitation that suggest its role in contributing to learning capacity. We describe how facilitation may contribute to generating knowledge about the application of new scientific knowledge in health-care organizations. Facilitation's promise, we suggest, lies in its potential to stimulate higher-order learning in organizations through experimenting with, generating learning about, and sustaining small-scale adaptations to organizational processes and work routines. The varied effectiveness of facilitation observed in the literature is associated with the presence or absence of factors known to influence organizational learning, since facilitation itself appears to act as a learning mechanism. We offer propositions regarding the relationships between facilitation processes and key organizational learning concepts that have the potential to guide future work to further our understanding of the role that facilitation plays in learning and knowledge generation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 307 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 301 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 19%
Researcher 32 10%
Student > Master 32 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 9%
Other 14 5%
Other 60 20%
Unknown 82 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 46 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 12%
Social Sciences 37 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 10%
Psychology 24 8%
Other 46 15%
Unknown 85 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,512,145
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#258
of 1,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,191
of 290,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#5
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,821 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 290,686 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.