‘Same, but different’: A mixed-methods realist evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled participatory organizational intervention

Abstract

Participatory organizational interventions are a recommended approach to improve the psychosocial work environment. As interventions of this type are shaped by employees and managers, their implementation can vary considerably, making evaluation challenging. This study contributes to our understanding of interventions by focusing on how the intervention mechanisms and the organizational context interact. In a mixed-methods design, we use multi-group structural equation modelling of pre-and post-intervention survey data ( N = 204) to test multiple mediational mechanisms in three different contexts. We then analyse interviews ( N = 67) and field observations of workshops to identify the role of contextual factors. The findings suggest that participatory organizational interventions do not produce one-size-fits-all results; on the contrary, intervention results are better understood as products of multiple intervention mechanisms interacting with the specific organizational contexts.

How to design, implement and evaluate organizational interventions for maximum impact: the Sigtuna Principles

“…Given that organizational interventions are dependent on their context, it is essential for the design, implementation, and evaluation to explicate how they are supposed to work. This involves outlining the logical links between the intervention activities and immediate, short-, and long-term outcomes (e.g., Pawson, 2013;Rogers, 2008) including identifying multiple possible intervention activities as well as multiple pathways (Abildgaard et al, 2019). Drawing on the field of program evaluation, this principle suggests explicating a program logic (also known as a program theory, logic model, impact pathway, or theory of intervention) as a way to clarify the proposed theoretical mechanisms that explain why certain activities are expected to produce certain outcomes (Pawson & Tilley, 1997).…”

Assessing the Role of Collective Efficacy Beliefs During Participative Occupational Health Interventions

“…This paper presents a pilot study of the development and exploratory validation of a questionnaire which assesses participant's overall quality of interventional activity within a group-based, participative intervention program. We assume that collective efficacy expectation moderates the quality of the intervention activity of the participants (19)(20)(21). Furthermore, we assume that collective efficacy beliefs are influenced by the psychosocial environment of the workplace.…”

H-WORK Project: Multilevel Interventions to Promote Mental Health in SMEs and Public Workplaces

“…Data will be provided by organisations (or representatives of organisations) including contextual information on the Any changes in these working mechanisms would lead together with improvements in the outcome of the multilevel interventions which is mental health and wellbeing. Indeed, as already highlighted by previous studies [26,[62][63][64][65][66], more and more researchers are encouraging the use of statistical analysis capable of combining and linking process evaluation data with effect evaluation data in order to gauge the interactions of each of the intervention activity developed. In this sense, based on longitudinal approach, the use of multilevel regressions or (multi-group) structured equation models make it possible to include, for instance, knowledge on how participants reacted to intervention activities and contents, and, at the same time, process data closely related to the intervention attributes (e.g., participation, dropout) and to relate them to the expected outcomes (e.g., well-being).…”