Document the characteristics applicable to the roles in the project based on the COM-B system or role-specific theories.
This subdomain includes the characteristics of individuals involved with implementing, delivering, and/or receiving the innovation. It includes characteristics related to professional skills and capabilities, autonomy, and level of involvement (Ashok et al., 2018; Dy et al., 2015; Moretto et al., 2019). Some users combine use of the CFIR with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) (S. A. Birken et al., 2017), which was developed with the intent “…to simplify and integrate a plethora of behavior change theories and make theory more accessible to, and usable by, other disciplines” (Cane et al., 2012). The TDF contains 84 behavior change-related constructs, organized into 14 domains. TDF domains are, in turn, mapped to an even more highly synthesized representation called the COM-B system (Michie et al., 2011, 2014). The COM-B was developed as a simplified system by which to acknowledge key domains related to behavior change based on consensus of behavioral theorists and a principle of criminal law defining specific prerequisites for volitional behavior. Three of the updated Characteristics are based on this COM-B system. The COM-B posits that the broad categories of Capability (e.g., skills), Opportunity (e.g., autonomy), and Motivation (e.g., commitment) shape behavior (Michie et al., 2011). We encourage users to draw on this extensive work and the work of other individual-level behavior change scientists (e.g., Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 2011) or the Social Ecological Theory (Stokols, 1996)) when more detailed theories are needed. Alternatively, users may rely on role-specific theories, for example, facilitation (Albers et al., 2020; Metz et al., 2020) and project management (Barron & Barron, n.d.-b; Müller & Turner, 2010) theories relevant for Implementation Facilitators and Implementation Leads; leadership (Albers et al., 2020; Metz et al., 2020) theories relevant for High- and Mid-level Leaders.
Qualitative coding guidelines that are aligned with the Updated CFIR will be added in the future.
As we become aware of measures, we will post them here. Please contact us with updates.
Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology & Health, 26(9), 1113–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.613995.
Albers, B., Metz, A., & Burke, K. (2020). Implementation support practitioners – a proposal for consolidating a diverse evidence base. BMC Health Services Research, 20(1), 368. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05145-1.
Ashok, M., Hung, D., Rojas-Smith, L., Halpern, M. T., & Harrison, M. (2018). Framework for Research on Implementation of Process Redesigns: Quality Management in Health Care, 27(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0000000000000158.
Barron, M., & Barron, A. (n.d.-a). Project Management Areas of Expertise. In Project Management. sue. Retrieved March 23, 2022, from https://cnx.org/contents/XpF315mY@11.6:_nDfs3nk@2/Project-Management-Areas-of-Expertise.
Birken, S. A., Powell, B. J., Presseau, J., Kirk, M. A., Lorencatto, F., Gould, N. J., Shea, C. M., Weiner, B. J., Francis, J. J., Yu, Y., Haines, E., & Damschroder, L. J. (2017). Combined use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF): A systematic review. Implementation Science : IS, 12(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0534-z.
Cane, J., O’Connor, D., & Michie, S. (2012). Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implementation Science, 7(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-37
Dy, S. M., Ashok, M., Wines, R. C., & Rojas Smith, L. (2015). A Framework to Guide Implementation Research for Care Transitions Interventions: Journal for Healthcare Quality, 37(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JHQ.0000460121.06309.f9.
Metz, A., Louison, L., Burke, K., & Ward, C. (2020). Implementation Support Practitioner Profile: Guiding principles and core competencies for implementation practice (p. 18). National Implementation Research Network. https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/resources/implementation-support-practitioner-profile.
Michie, S., Atkins, L., & West, R. (2014). The behaviour change wheel: A guide to designing interventions. Silverback.
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science : IS, 6, 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42.
Moretto, N., Comans, T. A., Chang, A. T., O’Leary, S. P., Osborne, S., Carter, H. E., Smith, D., Cavanagh, T., Blond, D., & Raymer, M. (2019). Implementation of simulation modelling to improve service planning in specialist orthopaedic and neurosurgical outpatient services. Implementation Science, 14(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0923-1.
Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.09.003.
Stokols, D. (1996). Translating Social Ecological Theory into Guidelines for Community Health Promotion. American Journal of Health Promotion, 10(4), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-10.4.282.