Relative Advantage

Stakeholders’ perception of the advantage of implementing the intervention versus an alternative solution [1]. Relative advantage must be recognized and acknowledged by all key stakeholders for effective implementation [2]. If users perceive a clear, unambiguous advantage in effectiveness or efficiency of the intervention, it is more likely the implementation will be successful. In fact, this perceived relative advantage is sine qua non for adoption/implementation [2]. Greenhalgh et al, the PRISM model, and Grol et al’s implementation model all list observability as a separate construct [2][3][4]. Benefits of the intervention must be clearly visible (observable) to stakeholders to assess relative advantage and thus, efforts to demonstrate benefits of the intervention clearly will help implementation [2][3][5][6][7]. Observability was incorporated into the relative advantage construct. Observability (or visibility) of benefits is tightly coupled with stakeholders’ perception of relative advantage and it would be challenging to tease out separable measures for both in the real world. Thus, we consolidated the two factors, while acknowledging the role of both. The extent to which the intervention is codifiable may also influence perception of relative advantage. Many interventions contain significant tacit components and may have significant benefits that are more difficult to understand or discern [8][9] and thus evaluate for relative advantage.