Towards a general theory of implementation

By Carl R. May. Implementation Science, 2013

624 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Understanding and evaluating the implementation of complex interventions in practice is an important problem for healthcare managers and policy makers, and for patients and others who must operationalize them beyond formal clinical settings. It has been argued that this work should be founded on theory that provides a foundation for understanding, designing, predicting, and evaluating dynamic implementation processes. This paper sets out core constituents of a general theory of implementation, building on Normalization Process Theory and linking it to key constructs from recent work in sociology and psychology. These are informed by ideas about agency and its expression within social systems and fields, social and cognitive mechanisms, and collective action. This approach unites a number of contending perspectives in a way that makes possible a more comprehensive explanation of the implementation and embedding of new ways of thinking, enacting and organizing practice.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c014bebc3d8c251a52464abadeb43ce68573a6c2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

1. Laura J. Damschroder
2. P. Nilsen
3. Byron J. Powell
4. Enola K. Proctor
5. J. Curtis McMillen
6. Tracy Finch
7. Mark A. Johnson
8. Susan Michie

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. P. Nilsen
2. Laura J. Damschroder
3. Byron J. Powell
4. Enola K. Proctor
5. Carl R. May
6. Fiona Seaton

Citations in the corpus

• Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks (2015, methodology): “May [141] has discussed how a “general theory of implementation” might be constructed by linking the four constructs of Normalization Process Theory with constructs from relevant sociology and psychology theories to provide a more comprehensive explanation of the constituents of implementation proce”
• Clarity out of chaos: Use of theory in implementation research. (2020, background): “Implementation scientists seek to understand the role and impact of each of these dimensions.”
• Implementation, context and complexity (2016, background): “2 Agency within implementation processes (2009) Analysis of mechanisms of agents’ contributions to implementation processes (sense-making, cognitive participation, collective action, reflexive monitoring) [24, 25].”
• Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework (2017, background): “At specific points, corrections, refinements or expansions [14, 82] are undertaken by implementation agents [85] in order to successfully implement an intervention.”
• Demystifying theory and its use in improvement (2015, background): “Similarly, Normalisation Process Theory, 23 Programme theories, on the other hand, provide what Lipsey 24 terms a ‘ small theory ’ for each intervention.”
• Implementation strategies: recommendations for specifying and reporting (2013, background): “Implementation strategies are inherently complex social interventions, as they address multifaceted and complicated processes within interpersonal, organizational, and community contexts [12,56-58].”