Pitstop EvidenceBased HR VOV lerend netwerk Gent 27 september 2012 EvidenceBased Management VOV leden n 86 EvidenceBased Practice 1991 Medicine 1998 Education ID: 310879
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "One or two things about Evidence-Based M..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
One or two things about Evidence-Based Management
Pitstop Evidence-Based HR, VOV lerend netwerk,Gent, 27 september 2012Slide2
Evidence-Based Management?
VOV leden, n= 86Slide3
Evidence-Based Practice
1991 Medicine1998 Education1999 Social care, public policy
2000
Nursing
2000
Criminal justice
????
Management
?Slide4
Definition
Evidence-based management means making decisions about the management of employees, teams or organizations through the conscientious
,
explicit
and
judicious
use of four sources of information:
1. The best available scientific evidence
2. Organizational facts, metrics and characteristics
3. Stakeholders’ values and concerns
4. Practitioner expertise and judgmentSlide5
Four sourcesSlide6
Four sourcesSlide7
Trust me: 20 years of management experience!Slide8
Bounded rationality Slide9
Bounded rationality Slide10
Seeing order in randomness
Mental corner cuttingMisinterpretation of incomplete dataHalo effectFalse consensus effectGroup thinkSelf serving bias
Sunk cost fallacy
Cognitive dissonance reduction
Confirmation bias
Authority bias
Small numbers fallacy
In-group bias
Recall bias
Anchoring bias
Inaccurate covariation detection
Distortions due to plausibility
Het
feilbare
breinSlide11
if you’re hyperventilating
breathe into a bagSlide12
elderly people who have an irregular heartbeat are much more likely to die of coronary disease
give them a drug that reduces the number of irregular beatsSlide13
How 40,000 cardiologists can be wrong
In the early 1980s newly introduced anti-arrhythmic drugs were found to be highly successful at suppressing arrhythmias. Not until a RCT was performed was it realized that, although
these drugs suppressed arrhythmias, they actually increased
mortality.
The CAST trial revealed
Excess mortality of 56/1000.
By the time the results of this trial were published, at least
100,000 such patients had been taking these drugs.Slide14
Errors and Biases of Human Judgment
Doctors
and managers hold many erroneous beliefs, not because they are ignorant or stupid, but because they seem to be the most sensible conclusion consistent with their own professional experience! available evidence.Slide15
Half of what you learn will be shown to be either dead wrong or out-of-date within 7 years of your graduation; the trouble is that nobody can tell you which half
Sackett: remember that your teachers are full of crap, just like your parents.
Problem II: false informationSlide16
Incompetent people benefit more from feedback than highly competent people.
Task conflict improves work group performance while relational conflict harms it.
Being intelligent is a disadvantage for performing low skilled
jobs.
Evidence-based?Slide17
Evidence-based?
Competentie
management
Excellente
zorg
Kwaliteits
management
Het
nieuwe
werken
Kennis
management
Magnet, Investors in People
Plain Tree, Healing Environment
Balanced Score Card / INK
Lean / Six Sigma / TOCSlide18
Think critically about experience, question your assumptions, and challenge what you think you know.
Don’t be a parrot!(Show me the evidence!)Slide19Slide20
Formulate a focused question
Searching for the best available evidenceCritical appraisalTurning evidence into practiceMonitor the outcome
5-step approachSlide21
Step 3: Critical
appraisal of studiesSlide22
B
est available evidence?Slide23
Research designs
What is the BEST car?Slide24
Which
design for which question?Research designsSlide25
Twee type
vragenEffect vs Non-effectSlide26
Type
vraag: effectWerkt het?Werkt het
beter
dan
....?
Heeft
het
een
effect op ....?
Wat
zijn
de
succesfactoren
voor
....?
Wat
is
nodig
om
het
te
laten
werken
?
EffectSlide27
Type: non-effect
Needs: Wat hebben mensen
nodig
,
waar
hebben
ze
behoefte
aan
?
Attitude:
Wat
denken
of
vinden
mensen
van ...?
Experience:
Wat
zijn
de
ervaringen
van
mensen
met ...?
Prevalence:
Hoeveel
mensen
/
organisaties
....?
Procedure:
Hoe
kunnen
we ....
implementeren
?
Explanation:
Waarom
werkt
het?
Economics:
Hoeveel
kost
het (
tijd
en geld)?Slide28
Explanation
Which design for which question?Slide29
Best research design?Slide30
Best available?Slide31
Evidence is not the same as ‘proof’ or ‘hard facts’
Evidence
can be
- so strong that no one doubts its correctness
, or
-
so weak that it is hardly convincing at all
What is evidence?Slide32
The best available evidence =
Studies with the highest internal validity
Studies with the highest external validitySlide33
internal validity
= indicates to what extent the results of the research may be biased and is thus a comment on the degree to which alternative explanations for the outcome found are possible (
confounding).
Internal validitySlide34
Confounding is the idea that a 3rd variable can distort or confuse (or confound..) a relationship between two other variables. For instance, when factor X causes disease Y, that relationship could be confounded by factor C that is associated with both factor X and disease Y. C would be an alternative explanation for the relationship observed between X and Y.
ConfoundingSlide35
What are the confounders?
Shoe size & quality of handwritingBody length
& body weight
Number of storks
&
birth rate
Smoking youngsters & better lung functionSlide36
?
Successful companies
Charismatic leaders
Reverse causationSlide37
Levels of internal validity
Were there enough subjects in the study?Was a control group used?
Were the subjects randomly assigned?
Was a pretest used?
Was the study started prior to the intervention or event?
Was the outcome measured in an objective and reliable way?
6x yes =
very high (A)
5x yes =
high (A)
4-3x yes =
limited (B)
2x yes =
low (C)
1-0x yes =
very low (D)Slide38
Levels of internal validitySlide39
Levels of internal validityIt is shown that …
It is likely that …
Experts are of the opinion that …
There are signs that …Slide40
Best available evidence:
external validitySlide41
Ecological validity
: Is your organization so different from those in the study
that
its results may be difficult to apply
?
Population validity
: Is your
population
so different from
those
in the study that its results
may be difficult to apply?
External validity: generalizability
Always ask yourself to what extent the evidence
is generalizable to your
situation:Slide42
GeneralizabilityKeep in mind:What works in one narrowly defined setting might not work in another,
but some psychological principles are generalizable to all human beings. Slide43
Step 4:
Turning evidence into practiceSlide44Slide45
Feasible?
organizational facts and characteristics
cultural aspects
stakeholders’ values and concerns
political aspects
financial aspects /cost-effectiveness / ROI
priorities
change readiness / resistance to change
implementation capacity
timingSlide46
Tot slot:
Focus on the decision making process!
(not the outcome)