Display options
Share it on

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Aug 07;18(16). doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168360.

Developing Initial Middle Range Theories in Realist Evaluation: A Case of an Organisational Intervention.

International journal of environmental research and public health

Hamid Roodbari, Karina Nielsen, Carolyn Axtell, Susan E Peters, Glorian Sorensen

Affiliations

  1. Institute for Work Psychology, Sheffield University Management School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK.
  2. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
  3. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA.

PMID: 34444110 PMCID: PMC8394353 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18168360

Abstract

(1) Background: Realist evaluation is a promising approach for evaluating organisational interventions. Crucial to realist evaluation is the development and testing of middle range theories (MRTs). MRTs are programme theories that outline how the intervention mechanisms work in a specific context to bring about certain outcomes. To the best of our knowledge, no organisational intervention study has yet developed initial MRTs. This study aimed to develop initial MRTs based on qualitative evidence from the development phase of an organisational intervention in a large multi-national organisation, the US food service industry. (2) Methods: Data were collected through 20 semi-structured interviews with the organisation's managers, five focus groups with a total of 30 employees, and five worksite observations. Template analysis was used to analyse data. (3) Results: Four initial MRTs were developed based on four mechanisms of participation, leadership commitment, communication, and tailoring the intervention to fit the organisational context to formulate 'what may work for whom in which circumstances?' in organisational interventions; (4) Conclusions: Our findings provide insights into 'how' and 'which' initial MRTs can be developed in organisational interventions.

Keywords: context–mechanism–outcome configuration; mechanism; middle range theory; organisational interventions; realist evaluation

References

  1. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Apr 24;16(8): - PubMed
  2. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006 Dec;32(6):515-27 - PubMed
  3. BMC Public Health. 2016 Dec 1;16(1):1212 - PubMed
  4. Ergonomics. 2019 Jan;62(1):31-41 - PubMed
  5. BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Jan 3;19(1):1 - PubMed
  6. BMC Med. 2013 Jan 29;11:21 - PubMed
  7. J Occup Environ Med. 2009 May;51(5):554-63 - PubMed
  8. J Hum Ergol (Tokyo). 2013 Dec;42(1-2):45-54 - PubMed
  9. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Feb 13;15(2): - PubMed
  10. J Occup Environ Med. 2020 Feb;62(2):e33-e45 - PubMed
  11. Health Serv Res. 1999 Dec;34(5 Pt 2):1189-208 - PubMed
  12. Work Stress. 2012 Apr;26(2):91-111 - PubMed
  13. Hum Relat. 2017 Aug;70(8):966-993 - PubMed
  14. BMC Public Health. 2014 Feb 08;14:135 - PubMed
  15. BMC Med. 2016 Jun 24;14(1):96 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support