Best practice representation and dissemination using visual outcomes models

A topic article within the Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base

The use of best practice is promoted in many sectors and by many disciplines. The most difficult aspect of dealing with best practice is getting best practices (once identified) actually implemented by the bulk of practitioners implementing programs and interventions on the ground. Visual outcomes models can assist in this area in the following four ways: 1) in working with practitioners to identify best practice; 2) in formally and unambiguously specifying (in a visual model) best practices; 3) in communicating best practices to practitioners in the field; 4) and in embedding best practice into program and intervention planning being undertaken by practitioners.

Introduction

The use of best practice is being promoted in many sectors and by many disciplines (see What is Best Practice?). The most difficult issue in regard to best practice is how to actually get best practice implemented on the ground once it has been identified. What can happen in some cases is that an intensive, and often expensive evaluation (or review), exercise is undertaken to identify best practice. However, once this work has been done, insufficient effort is put into making sure that the best practice so identified is actually implemented by practitioners in other programs and interventions. Part of the problem is that those funding the best practice identification work may find it hard to accept the cost involved in making sure that best practices are actually applied in the field. Identifying efficient ways of disseminating best practice, such as suggested in this article, would help improve this current problem.

The use of visual outcomes models in best practice

Visual outcomes models (exmples can be seen at OutcomesModels.org), drawn according to a set of Standards for Drawing Outcomes Models are a way of visually representing what happens within programs and interventions. Such models tend to be different from traditional logic models (intervention logics, results chains, strategy maps etc.) in that they can be of any size rather than the usual practice of restricting them to a single page (if visualized within suitable outcomes software such as DoView  [1]. They can also, include  detailed modeling right down into a program rather than attempting to exclude 'activities' and 'processes' from such models as is often done in traditionally drawn logic models. See Simplifying terms used when working with outcomes for more information about the reasons why there was this limitation in the past. The consequence of this is that such outcomes models can provide a rich environment in which to effectively model best practice. 

Such visual outcomes models can be used in the following ways in best practice work:

1. Working with groups to specify what is best practice

Visual outcomes models can be used when working with practitioner groups to identify what that group believes best practice to be. This can either be part of a process of just helping the group identify best practice, or it can be part of a more comprehensive process where the visual outcomes model prepared by the group is then assessed in some sort of evaluative process to see if it actually is 'best' practice in some sense. (See the Easy Outcomes approach for a comprehensive approach to doing this).

2. Formally and unambiguously specifying best practice

Visual outcomes models have the advantages over some other types of specifying best practice (e.g. narrative text-based descriptions). Visual models force those developing the model to specify what they believe is the sequence of steps involved in implementing the 'best practice'. This level of specification is often reflected in the fact that groups developing such visual models often have detailed arguments about the sequence of steps which they would not have had if they had been working with narrative format. Within narrative formats there is often much less specification of exactly what steps occur in implementing a best practice.

3. Communicating best practice to practitioners in the field

Visual outcomes models provide a rapid way of communicating best practice to practitioners in the field so that they can consider incorporating it into their practice. Due to the time pressures practitioners work under, they often do not have time to read extensive narrative descriptions of best practice. Visual outcomes models let them rapidly assess what is being proposed in the best practice and they can then determined how it differs from their current practice and ways they may be able to incorporate it into their practice.  

4. Embedding best practice in program and intervention planning 

Practitioners are increasingly using outcomes models of various types in planning their programs and interventions. Therefore visual outcomes models which encapsulate best practice can be used as a basis for program and intervention planning by practitioners who can then amend such models for their own circumstances. This means that best practice is brought right into the heart of the practitioners' planning activity. This is in contrast to the current situation where practitioners may see demands that they implement best practice as another separate activity, separate from normal program planning to which they need to allocate their scarce time.  

Working with visual outcomes models to spread best practice

The way in which best practice could be identified, specified and disseminated in this way could be as follows:

  1. Visual outcomes models could be developed by those identifying best practice.
  2. These could then be made available on the internet (either the open internet, behind a password, or on an intranet)
  3. The programs in which it is hoped best practice will be applied could be required (or incentivized) to produce visual outcomes models drawn according to the outcomes theory outcomes model standards. This will encourage them to pick up on the best practice models available on the internet. 
  4. Whether or not programs are actually implementing the lower levels (where best practice is embodied) of their outcomes models could be monitored as part of the overall monitoring and evaluation of the programs.
How to do all of this is set out on the web site of an applied version of outcomes theory - Easy Outcomes - provides could just be pointed at the resources on this site and told to get on with it. One visual example of aspects of how this could work is provide below:



Figure 1: Mock-up of 'best practice' visual outcomes model with links out to expert evidence summaries links in the model for rapid dissemination of best practice across a sector by embedding it in the visual outcomes modeling (program logic model) approach the sector uses for program planning


Conclusion

This article has argued that there is a problem in getting best practice applied and that it may be that the use of visual outcomes models provides a cost-effective method of doing this. This requires that the visual outcomes models be drawn in a particular way so that they can provide a rich and comprehensive environment in which best practice could be modeled and communicated. How such an approach could be encouraged by requiring programs to produced their own visual outcomes models is outlined.

Please comment on this article

This article is based on the developing area of outcomes theory which is still in a relatively early stage of development. Please critique any of the argument laid out in this article so that they can be improved through critical examination and reflection.

Acknowledgments

Some of the material in this article was presented in the following conference presentation: Duignan, P. (2008). DoView visual logic models as a front-end for evidence-based practice web databases. American Evaluation Association Conference , Denver 5-8 November 2008.

Citing this article

Duignan, P. (2009). Best practice representation and dissemination using visual outcomes models. Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base Article No. 217. (http://knol.google.com/k/paul-duignan-phd/best-practice-representation-and/2m7zd68aaz774/34).

This article originally had the title: Using visual outcomes models to represent, communicate and get best practice implemented on the ground.

[If you are reading this in a PDF or printed copy, the web page version may have been updated].

[Outcomes Theory Article #217]

References

  1. Full Disclosure: The author is involved in the development of DoView outcomes and evaluation software.
  2. Duignan, P. (2008). DoView visual logic models as a front-end for evidence-based practice web databases. American Evaluation Association Conference , Denver 5-8 November 2008.
  3. These visual models once created in DoView can be uploaded to any intranet or internet site - so this approach is a generic one which could be used in any sector.
  4. In order to edit a model, the user needs to have a copy of DoView outcomes software installed on their computer. They then simply click on 'Download a copy of the DoView file of this model' in the Options Bar at the bottom of the web page model and it will open in the copy of DoView on their computer ready for them to edit and use to create a visual outcomes model of their particular program.

Comments


Alexandra Ritchie

Outcomes modeling seems great, but when do you find the time to do it?

I think that DoView probably would go a long way to advance the use of outcomes modeling in program planning and other decision-making, but how do you create buy-in for doing this kind of work in the first place? Most managers (program managers and others) in my organization have mental models of these processes, but it's a challenge to reach consensus within a program office or larger group in the organization on a single way of describing those process steps and then even greater (in most cases) to turn that into an actual diagram. How can we shift their thinking so that it doesn't appear as though this process of documenting, diagramming these processes to show you how to arrive at particular outcomes takes longer and requires more resources (staff, software, equipment) than more traditional (e.g. less academic/scientific, more intuitive/instinctual) ways of managing programs? Thanks!

Last edited Sep 28, 2009 8:21 PM
Report abusive comment
©2009 Google