Week 6 Post - The Talents of Wisdom and Evidence-Based Human Resources

Pfeffer & Sutton (2006) incorporate a table of the talents of wisdom.  This table describes the personality types that sustain organizational learning.  It was surprising to see the descriptions of the individuals as they sound like they have strong negative connotations with them.  The 'Noisy Complainers' quickly repair problems and then let everyone know the system failed (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  The 'Noisy Troublemakers' point out others mistakes to help them and the system learn (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  The 'Mindful Error-Makers' tell others about their mistakes so others can avoid them too (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  The 'Disruptive Questioners' constantly seek a better way to do things (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  Looking only at the descriptive names of the people, they sound extremely negative, but looking at the descriptions, it is easy to see how beneficial they are to the development of the organization.  These are important to the organization because when there is an error it needs to be addressed and subsequently fixed.  Individials described as the most talented cause the same mistakes to happen repeatedly by not complaining, silently correcting others' mistakes, don't question flawed practices, and create the impression they never fail (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  It is easy to see that people who 'create waves' (when done constructively) can be critical to the development and improvement of an organzation.  Do you think that you fall into one of the above categories?  Do you think one of the catergories above is better than any of the others?

Working in healthcare, we are constantly having new evidence-based practices come into practice.  As these new changes need to be implemented, a challenge arises.  This challenge is how to best implement change when people are always so resistant toward it, so this is always something that interests me.  From the reading this week, it discusses building the capability for EBHR (Evidence-Based Human Resources).  The main points are: improving internal capability, better use of external evidence, and addressing wider challenges (Hirsch & Briner, 2011).  Each point has a deeper point that is related to building the people capability and building the data capability (Hirsch & Briner, 2011).  Having target points for building organizational capability for the implementation of any type of evidence-based information is a critical step in actually becoming evidence-based ran organization (Hirsch & Briner, 2011).  EBHR is an approach to decision-making in which the application of logic, systematic search for the best available evidence is applied and evaluated (Hirsch & Briner, 2011).  This helps to eliminate the incorporation of fads and trends in business and HR.  Do you utilize evidence-based practices where you work?  Do you think that including evidence-based practices would make a difference in your work place?  A great resource tool for HR questions, news, legal, jobs and many other things related to HR is the Human Capital Magazine.
A Glassdoor Survey asked employees about education versus specialized training for enhancing job skills.  The majority said that a Bachelor's degree helped them with their career but many feel that beyond that training versus an advanced degree would be more beneficial to career development.  The overarching theme in the article is that experience is more likely to land a larger paycheck or another job more than having greater educational credentials.  74% of the respondants stated that employers value experience more than education and 72% stated that training programs for specific skills are more valuable than additional degrees.  There is evidence behind this article based on the survey results; however there is no evidence to say whether or not the opinions of the respondants is actually true.  Does more experience over education get you a better job?  I would like to know that information to determine whether that actually holds true or not before I hold onto what the responses were from the survey as fact.  This is a survey that is done quarterly and then compared with prior quarter responses, so there is some consistency to it, but again I would be curious as to actual results of job applicants and who was hired more often the one with great education or the one with more experience?  I would imagine if it actually came down to it, the one with more experience will take the cake.
This week I learned a lot of different things.  I further developed my ideas and definitions on diversity from the IU videos on diversity.  I learned that a noisy complainer may not always be a bad thing.  I found out that even HR should have evidence-based information when making decisions because it too needs to work from best practices instead of fads and trends.  Next week we get to present our final project and then we are done with summer classes!

Hirsch, W. & Briner, R. (2011). Evidence-Based HR: From Fads to Facts? Corporate Research Forum. Retrieved from: http://www.cebma.org/wp-content/uploads/CRF-EBHR-report-aug-2011.pdf.

Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense: profiting from evidence-based management. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.

Montini, L. (2014). Glassdoor Survey: Employees Want More Training Programs, Not Degrees. Inc.com. Retrieved from: http://www.inc.com/laura-montini/glassdoor-survey-employees-want-more-training-programs-not-degrees.html

Week 5 Post - Total Quality Management Changes and Getting to the Heart of Change

One thing that really interests me in my work in health care is quality improvement (QI).  Pfeffer and Sutton (2006) touched upon quality improvement efforts as a potential dangerous organizational change.  Pfeffer and Sutton (2006) stated, "Six Sigma and Total Quality Management (TQM) efforts can increase quality and incremental innovation.  But focusing on tiny improvements in old systems can distract management attention and resources from the big picture" (p163).  Oftentimes TQM turns out to be only talk with maybe some minimal training and no action on the improvement project (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  Studies say the increase in TQM as a business hot topic came after TQM turned into a fad (Pfeffer and Sutton), 2006.  Quality improvement can be a great tool when utilized correctly.  I think that if there is scientific evidence behind an improvement initiative it is worth the discussion and possible training of staff if it yields a positive result.  For example, my fellowship project at work is to decrease hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (HAPUs) in patients who are stuck in bed due to devices present to assist their cardiac/pulmonary systems.  We are trialing a prophylactic dressing to help relieve pressure on patients' coccyx.  The trial came about after I read some scientific evidence-based articles that, according to the literature, patients had a decrease in HAPUs with the dressing in place.  I think a big part of TQM and QI is to have staff involvement in order to have successful outcomes the initiatives.  My project probably would not have gotten done if I did not initiatie it and get the rest of the staff on board by making a persuasive argument - patient safety.  Have you ever tried implementing a quality improvement where you work?  Do you think it is a dangerous organizational change or is it something critical to organzational survival?

The other concept that from week 5 that was interesting was the John Kotter's video 'The Heart of Change.'  I found his points about driving change and successful implementation take more than just getting people to think about the change.  The people need to feel the change.  He points out that when trying to get people on board with new changes the focus on thinking/feeling is usually only 90/10 maybe 80/20 at best.  By getting people more emotionally involved with the changes, the potential for successful change implementation is greater.  This is important for managers because as he pointed out in a later video, the frequency of change within organizations is increasing.  The most difficult portion of implementing a change is getting staff to follow and support the change.  By driving the feeling component of selling a change, a manager would be able to get more people on board to help drive the change.  Have you ever resisted change from within your organization?  Do you think implementing change should be easier or is it almost a natural response to have employees resist change?
The article, "Good Leaders Persuade. They Don't Manipulate" (2014) by Harrison Monarth discusses the importance of making sure that leaders persuade members of their staff versus using manipulative tactics like, 'you get to keep your job.'  While this does not directly relate to change or TQM, it does help with the ways to implement the two concepts which are very similar to one another.  Monarth points out that, "[m]anipulators are heard, but persuaders are believed because they are trusted."  In addition to that strong quote, he highlights other differences between manipulation and persuasion, all of which are great points, but none of which are scientific-based.  I think if there were some strong evidence-based points this article could turn into a great QI development.  The recommendations though are fact based with definitions of words and concepts.
Next week I look forward to learning about HR issues since that has been a hot topic in my work environment over the last 4 years.  I am also excited to start wrapping up the team project and seeing how it looks when it is complete.  This past week was a great week for me as change is such a huge issue to overcome, particularly for nurses.  The Mind Tools website discusses Change Management and has a change tool box with tools to help understand, plan, implement, and communicate change.  A lot of the additional websites I looked at reference Kotter's 8-Step Change Model, which I would have included, except it was already listed on the course website.


Monarth, H. (2014). Good Leaders Persuade. They Don't Manipulate. Entrepreneur. Retrieved from: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/235320
Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense: profiting from evidence-based management. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.

Week 4 Post - The Hierarchy Return and Your Best BATNA

According to Pfeffer's article, 'You're Still the Same: Why Theories of Power Hold Over Time and Across Contexts,*' the concept of a hierarchy is something that has not gone away and according to recent research has actually been noted to be the preferred method of dealing with accomplishing some work task.  Hierarchies create important consequences for behavior and also enable the concept of social inequalities.  Hierarchies also allow for individuals to see who is 'in charge' and for organizational arrangments that include spans of control, degrees of centralization/decentralization, and others.  Hierarchies allow for a reporting system from the bottom of the pyramid to the top.  The concept of a hierarchy also presents the idea that inidividials want to be near the top and will behave accordingly in order to get there.  The implications for management that people like hierarchies is that people enjoy that type of structure within a work environment.  It allows managers to know that people prefer structure for work tasks and work in general instead of groups without defined roles.  Also it is a way to effectively draw out desired behaviors in individuals who are interested in moving up the pyramid.  Do you prefer a hierarchy or a group without defined roles?  Do you think a hierarchy is the only effective business  model for getting individuals to elicit desired behaviors?
Here are some other qualities of a hierarchy.


The one concept that I find to be really interesting that I enjoyed learning about this past week from the BATNA Basics article is the BATNA itself.  BATNA is an acronym for Best Alternative to a Negotiation Agreement.  It consists of the following four steps: List your alternatives, Evaluate your alternatives, Establish your BATNA and Calculate your reservation value.  A really good definition of a BATNA is the purchase of a new car.  What is your best alternative, do you have a reservation value for the most you are willing to spend, what alternatives do you have (can you keep an old car, can you buy a used car, other forms of transportation), how important is this to you, etc?  BATNAs are important to recognize and understand in order to effectively negotiate for both your self and your organization.  There needs to be a limit as to how much you can negotiate and it helps you to negotiate more effectively knowing what your alternatives are and how valuable they may or may not be.  This all boils down to preparation.  Going into a negotiation and being prepared for the negotiation can make a world of difference in how successful you can come out.  Have you ever preparared for a negotiation in the same way you would for a presentation?  How successfully have you negotiated in the past?

In an article by Jennifer Lawler, she discusses the costs of workplace conflict.  According to study from 2008, employees in the U.S. spent an average of 2.8 hours per week dealing with workplace conflicts.  Based on average earnings of around $18.00, that totals to $359 billion in paid hours.  This time includes gossiping, retaliating, recruiting people to one side versus another, planning defenses, and navigating the drama.  Costs associated with drama can be attributed to: use of sick days and employee turnover in addition to the paid at-work time that employees utilize for conflict management.  The most important thing to do when dealing with conflict is to stay objective and be proactive even with subtle hints of conlift.  A lot of the information within this article is fairly reliable with respect to the numbers.  The calculations all appear to be correct and accurate, although I don't know if $18.00 was an accurate average hourly wage even in 2008.  Some of the other information, such as conflict resolution examples was based off of personal experiences or non-scientific based-information.  It would be nice to see some true success rates to give an idea of how successful a certain conflict management intervention may be.

Lawler, J. (2014). The Real Cost of Workplace Conflict. Entrepreneur. Retrieved from: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/207196.

In Week 5, I look forward to working more on the group project and further fleshing out the Evidence-based suggestions in preparation for the final project component.  Additionally, I am really excited about learning about culture and change management as these are two big items that take place within the health care arena.  It is something that needs dealth with and effectively managed both for the individual and the organization.

BATNA Basics: Boost Your Power at the Bargaining Table. (2012). Harvard Law School. Retrieved from: file:///Users/cameronblissell/Downloads/13_BATNA%20(2).pdf

Pfeffer, J. (2013, November). You're Still The Same: Why Theories of Power Hold over Time and Across Contexts*. The Academy of Management Perspectives. Retrieved from: http://jeffreypfeffer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/AcadPerspectives13.pdf.

Week 3 Post - Managing Leadership Power and Developing Teamwork.

A paradox of becoming an effective leader is that it is necessary for one to successfully instill confidence in others while simultaneously not absorbing the projected confidence into oneself.  Essentially it is imperative to recognize that if you believe you are powerful, you can actually wreck your organization.  Pfeffer & Sutton (2006) utilize Professor Deborah Gruenfeld's research of the effects that take place when someone enters into a position of power.  Essentially those people start talking more, take what they want, ignore what others say, act rudely, and treat people and situations as pawns to satisfy their own needs (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).  This concept is extremely important because power can easily go to someone's head.  As more people are underneath someone in an organization, the leader(s) can see that as an opportunity to have a power surge.  I read an article that described the prevalence of 'corporate psychopaths.'  The article described how these functional psychopaths move up in an organization by being overly charismatic, but ultimately, they put their needs ahead of the organizations and are essentially power hungry.  It is just important for people to remember as they climb their career ladder to never believe you are more powerful than anyone else.  Have you experienced leaders who believe they are powerful, or, maybe more correctly stated, take opportunities to 'cut you down' essentially, because they can?  Should there be a limit on the amount of power and decision-making abilities of an individual to prevent the feeling of power over others within an organization?

Another thing that I found interesting this week was the concept of group reception of women and minorities and their contributions within team dynamics.  Women and minorities often have difficulties with having their ideas both heard and utilized.  Women are often less likely to be perceived as experts on a subject even though they may actually be equally or even more knowledgeable within a given area of study when compared to a man.  Female experts are also perceived as less influential in the sense that they were less able to get the teams to do what they wanted them to do.  Female opinions were actually more highly regarded, however, when their opinions were intentionally solicited by another team member.  This is important to recognize because it ties into diversity and the benefits that are able to be reaped.  These individuals are able to contribute ideas from different perspectives and they are often not considered because of gender or ethnicity (which in these instances is seen as a handicap).  I think a take away for management should be to maintain tact when exercising group work.  In order to yield the best solutions or ideas, solicit them from individuals.  Ask someone point blank if he/she has a specific idea, and because the manager/leader took interest in that individual, maybe the group as a whole will too.  Do you find that women and minorities (this can also be men as a minority) are not taken as seriously as men within a group decision-making process?  Aside from soliciting ideas, are there other ways to get other group members to take stock in a 'minority' person's idea?

The article, Building and Leading High Performance Teams by Chris Mussel White lists a lot of great suggestions for effective team development and employment.  Some of the highlights of the article include: promoting understanding, ensuring the team has adequate knowledge, facilitating effective intervention, understanding the big picture, having common goals, and working as a unit.  There is no data to back these suggestions, and while many sound really great, I would be curious to know what the implementation success rate is for these suggestions.  I think they are definitely supported by general knowledge and when you research anything regarding a successful team, these exact qualities or ones that are extremely similar will be included within the results.  The article definitely highlights some strong points, but it really isn't anything that is not listed elsewhere.  I'd like to see some numbers with respect to performance and financial changes for organizations pre- and post-implementation/development of those team traits.  I feel like some of them are overly optimistic and often times to get everyone on board with something and maintain all those qualities is really difficult to nurture that within a group and the culture outside of the group as well.

I learned a lot about great leaders and issues and half-truths that are associated with them.  I also was really interested in the teamwork components from the week.  The dynamic team video was great to watch along with the articles that I read.  Currently at work we have a really low morale on my unit and the teamwork is broken at best.  Myself and another nurse have been working to try and improve the culture there and make it a happier place overall.  The information on the teams and their effectiveness was a great learning opportunity for me and I am going to try to implement some of that within my unit at work.  Next week I look forward to learning about conflict and negotiation as I had two verbal conflicts with employees today.

White, C. M. (2007, January 1). Building and Leading High Performance Teams. Retrieved from: http://www.inc.com/resources/leadership/articles/20070101/musselwhite.html.

Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense: profiting from evidence-based management. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.

Thomas-Hunt, M. (2013). Team Dynamics [Video]. LeanIn.org. Retrieved from: http://leanin.org/education/team-dynamics/.

Week 2 Post- Good & Bad Financial Incentives and Bubbles

An interesting concept from this week's readings was the three effects Pfeffer & Sutton (2006) discussed related to financial incentives.  They pointed out that these incentives can either enhance organizational performance or if badly designed or misapplied can damage performance.  The first effect is the motivational effect where financial incentives motivate more effort.  An example of the motivational effect would be the ski company that I worked for where you had to put together an entire ski outfit for someone in order to get commission.  This means the sales person had to work and sell more to get the extra money.  It took more effort and as a result he/she earned more money.  The second effect is the informational effect where the incentive provides people with information about what the company values and what its priorities are.  An example the book listed was a reward not for sales or volume moved, but for shrink (lost or stolen inventory) paid to each individual within a store. The last effect is the selection effect.  This effect is able to attract the correct people for the position and drive away the wrong people.  An example is someone who is willing to work harder and longer if needed within a competitive environment when there is an opportunity to earn more money.  Individuals who do not like competitive environments but choose jobs where lower motivation and performance is not penalized as heavily will steer clear of financial incentive-driven careers.  I think these are important to recognize because financial incentives are often viewed as being negative, particularly from the consumer's perspective.  I know people have asked me at the ski shop how much commission I get and I always replied just on some things.  The thought of commission makes some people really uncomfortable because it makes them question the integrity of their sales person.  People don't take into account that although the sales person is receiving a commission they might also be more motivated to help and better equipped to help the individual find the correct items due to a stronger sales knowledge.  These effects are important for managers because, when used appropriately, it can help them to find the best people to fill the jobs within the company.  They can find motivated, proactive people who will take a strong interest in the company and work hard to give themselves a competitive edge which typically in turns help the company out as well.   Financial incentives still should be implemented with caution because I have seen times where it makes the sales person aggressive.  Also managers should be careful not to use financial incentives as a form of punishment.  The article linked here lists pros and cons of financial incentives, but the important part is about 3/4 way down the page where it discusses incentives as punishments.  Do you think there are other ways to sort out who is best for the job and to instill motivation without offering money?  How has your experience been when working with people (purchasing items either personally or professionally) who are driven by financial incentives?

A large concern is that financial incentives can attract the wrong type of talent.  People go to companies where they feel they can best succeed and simultaneously earn the most income.  The issue with this is that those people will leave for other jobs that offer more money or better incentives.  So, you have people who go to work for themselves and not the company only to leave for another company offering more.  If everything is about the numbers after a dollar sign, how do you entice people into an organization and get them to stay other than money and benefits?  James Treybig (the CEO of Tandem Computers) did something relatively radical when hiring new employees (even at senior executive levels) they would not disclose the salary or benefits.  They only said that they were offering competitive wages and benefits to their new employee.  If the employee insisted on knowing his/her precise wage, they were no longer considered as a prospective candidate.  His rationale for this?  Treybig made the point that if people came for money, they would also leave for money.  He found that turnover was disruptive and wanted people to stay with the organization because they liked the company, the work, the management, the culture, other employees.  I think that this is a bold move, but if someone truly loves the job and understands the position he/she is entering into (given the 'competitive wages and benefits package') then there should be no issue.  This might be the best way to get people into the company for the company and not for the money.  I think management could utilize this for a smaller organization.  Somewhere like UPMC might not be able to get away with this for a position such as an RN where there are thousands of them.  Management would have to be very careful though to actually offer a competitive wage and benefit package.  The employee is taking a large leap of faith by going into a position with no clue what he/she is getting in terms of compensation.  The trust between the employee and the employer would be shattered if it was far below the average.  It is something that could work, but is very risky and must be cautiously executed.  How do you think the job application process would be if people never knew what they would be getting paid until they were employed would be?  Would you take a job not knowing the exact amount of money you'd be making (keep in mind it's competitive in terms of similar positions, so you know around what amount you would be making)?
The article The Incentive Bubble by Mihir Desai discusses the potential of distorted incentives, the need to pop the financial incentive bubble, and how to successfully pop that bubble.  The article lists some opinions, and while most are fact-based, none seem to be based on scientific evidence.  Some of the information provided in this article includes how incentives have become distorted (asymmetrical payoffs and monitor managers/investors outsourced performance evaluations).  There needs to be a baseline for normal work outcome expectations, so that financial rewards can be distributed for going above the baseline.  With respect to the information provided in the article, there are a lot of strong suggestions that are proposed.  I think that they would be more reliable if there was scientific evidence backing those suggestions.  For example, the information would be more credible if it included successful examples of where some of the suggestions were implemented and had positive outcomes. The suggestions are good, but they are difficult to believe effective without having tried some of them out for results.  It is easy to make promising suggestions that may not be realistic.  The article, on first glance seems really credible, but after evaluating it from a scientific-evidence viewpoint, it certainly becomes less credible and more like a false promise.

Image Link

I really enjoyed learning about the impacts of financial incentives (both good and bad).  I found the good examples of the incentives very interesting because I often wouldn't think of any benefit of financial incentives except to the person receiving the incentive.  The other thing I really enjoyed learning about was the TED talks.  The TED talk videos provided a lot of insight into different things regarding topics such as choices and positive psychology.  I look forward to working further on our group project next week and the discussions regarding team effectiveness.

Desai, M. (2012, March). The Incentive Bubble. Hardvard Business Review. Retrieved from: http://hbr.org/2012/03/the-incentive-bubble/ar/5.
Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-Based Management. Hardvard Business School Press: Boston.

Week 1 Post- Evidence-Based Management: Importance and Its Difficulties

One of the most important concepts that was discussed in the book, Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths and Total Nonsense, by Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert I. Sutton was the definition of evidence-based management.  According to Pfeffer and Sutton, "[e]vidence-based management is based on the belief that facing hard facts about what works and what doesn't, understanding the dangerous half-truths that constitute so much conventional wisdom about management, and rejecting the total nonsense that too often passes for sound advice will help organizations perform better" (pg 13).  Evidence based practices are what drives the health care industry.  Trials and studies are completed in order to see what treatments yield the best outcomes for patients.  This guiding practice for medicine is partly what inspired evidence-based business management.  In terms of health care, an example of evidence-based management practices would be a manager practicing what he/she preaches to staff and maintaining transparency versus a 'do as I say, not as I do' style leadership.  From my health care quality class, evidence supports that staff are more receptive and more loyal to changes if a manager also takes stock in those changes.  Implementing changes within the health care realm is often difficult due to the number of responsibilities that a nurse for example has to manage in an individual day.  Effective management styles (without immediately turning toward punishments) can facilitate the transition, while ineffective management styles are met with push back and resistance from nurses.  Evidence-based management helps to guide management with the most effective styles of leadership.  I think this is very important because it is helpful to learn from others with respect to what can work the best and what may not work at all versus having to do trial and error yourself.  Pfeffer and Sutton mention that managers should be suspicious of breakthrough studies and ideas.  It is important to not take every single new piece of information as the new standard.  Not to start a controversial fire, but look at the article written about the link between vaccines and autism and the detrimental effects it has had on preventive vaccines across the country and the world.  Illnesses like whooping cough have become increasingly more prevalent and with more deaths associated with the illness.  The article has since been formally retracted since no formal link has been establish between autism and vaccinations.  If treated appropriately and compared against other evidence-based practice studies, then it is safe and beneficial to research this type of information.  A manager must pay attention to the culture that he works in and evaluate what may work best for himself and those around him.  Do you think it is beneficial to evaluate new management styles even if the organize already runs smoothly?  Is it best to look toward evidence-based management or be creative and develop your own?
Another important concept from this week's discussions is what makes it difficult to be evidence-based.  Some of the bumps in the golden road for evidence-based management include there is too much evidence, there is a lack of good evidence, the evidence does not quite apply, and people are trying to mislead you.  This translates into: management's efforts to bring the best evidence to bear on decisions, but even though an individual follows business press, buys the books, hires consultants, evidence-based management is still difficult to apply.  This is important to recognize because evidence-based management may actually be difficult to apply in every instance.  It certainly is not a one-size-fits-all scenario and the majority, if not all, evidence-based management suggestions may not be applicable for an organization.  In the article, "Evidence-Based Management," a major issue with evidence-based management is that there is so much evidence available, but the majority of it is not good evidence.  There is not enough of an in-depth study and often does not go beyond subject assessments of their value.  Even though a new or different style of management may sound really promising, it should be taken into consideration against other styles and against the organization's culture and beliefs before automatically implementing it.  Is there such a thing as too much evidence-based information (considering the number of journals and articles that are published on a yearly basis)?  Based on the downsides of, is trying to follow evidence-based practices for management worth spending millions of dollars or is it better to be creative and find something on your own that works well?
The article, How Changing Gears Stopped MyStartup from Failing by Karim Abouelnaga, discusses the effects, benefits, and success of doing evidence-based research on his non-profit partnership.  The group ran a mentor to mentee ratio of 1:2 without any rationale as to why they chose that number other than it sounded appropriate to the founders of the group.  The founders did trials on groups ranging from ratios of 1:1 to 1:6 and found that a ratio of 1:4 worked best.  The group initially had no rationale for the group size and after doing a trial in order to yield evidence-based data, they found that they were able to conduct groups at ratios of 1:4 and achieve the highest levels of productivity.  The group did perform evidence-based research, but it was only on participants related to their organization.  With respect to their work though, it was a successful outcome for creating evidence-based outcomes as their results are strong enough to drive an initiative.  It should be noted that even for this group, it cannot be a set in stone standard because some individuals may require more one-on-one care and others may not.  It is not broad enough to make a generalization for a standard type of result, either.  Abouelnaga knew well enough that the initial startup is not the end result, so pivot points were developed to help gauge performance and progress (Abouelnaga, 2014).
My personal learning mostly stemmed from negatives against evidence-based practices.  I was aware of the number of articles and practices that are available based on the amount of articles published per year.  I had never considered that an overload of information is a negative and that the information truly might not be termed 'good.'  I thought and still think it is important to try and follow evidence-based suggestions, but that those same suggestions need to be taken with a grain of salt.  When looking toward evidence-based initiatives to update guiding practices, it should consist of reviewing more than one article.  The other item that really struck me was the table of current standards versus evidence-based management.  I thought it was odd that evidence-based management recommends to treat old ideas like old ideas.  I know that in health care, practices can be recycled.  Intervention A gets replaced with intervention B and then ten years later, intervention B is replaced with A again.  Next week goals for learning are to see what drives company performance and to have my postings on time since I finally figured out what was wrong with my voice comments.

Abouelnaga, K. (2014, February, 6). How Changing Gears Stopped MyStartup from Failing. Entrepreneur, inc. Retrieved from: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/231291
Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-Based Management. Hardvard Business School Press: Boston.
Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Evidence-Based Management. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: http://www.cebma.org/wp-content/uploads/Pfeffer-Sutton-Evidence-Based-Management.pdf.

Image Link