Kevin C. Wooten

Linking OD’s philosophy with justice theory: postmodern implications

The purpose of this article is twofold; first, to demonstrate a linkage between the tenets of justice theory and OD core values, assumptions and ethical beliefs and, second, to show the role of this linkage as it applies to postmodern organizations in terms of the evolution of OD technology. Distributive, procedural and interactional justice is discussed and juxtaposed with the humanistic and organizational effectiveness orientations that compise the core values of OD. Finally, ways are suggested that the linkage between justice theory and OD core values can be used for the development of OD science and its application to the postmodern organizational paradigm of equality, empowerment and horizontal relationships.

Ethical dilemmas in human resource management: an application of a multidimensional framework, a unifying taxonomy, and applicable codes

Abstract Human resource management (HRM) is currently undergoing rapid professionalization. One area, which has not been fully examined from a scholarly nor practitioner perspective, is that of ethical dilemmas. Ethical dilemmas in HRM can be seen as multifaceted, involving personal, professional, and organizational considerations. A general model of five ethical dilemmas [Acad. Manage. Rev. 8 (1983) 690.] is applied to HRM in general and to eight HRM functions, illustrating 40 specific examples of potentially unethical behavior. Ethical codes of five professional associations are reviewed in relation to general categories of ethical dilemmas, and their coverage is discussed.

The CTSA as an Exemplar Framework for Developing Multidisciplinary Translational Teams

Translational science requires that scientists from multiple disciplines work together to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of human disease. Although a literature exists on the design and management of multidisciplinary teams, little has been written on multidisciplinary translational teams (MTTs). MTTs are distinct hybrid entities, with goals taken from both industry and academic models. We identified 30 design factors in 10 domains from a literature survey relevant to our MTT model: specific goals, structures, and processes. These dimensions were adapted to our own institutional environment in the selection and management of 11 MTTs that exploited resources of University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) Clinical and Translational Sciences Awards (CTSA). Case illustrations of two specific MTTs illustrate some of the challenges encountered and opportunities realized in terms of education and scientific advances. Network depiction of disciplinarity indicated that CTSA KRs and CTSA leadership contributed to discipline diversity especially in small (or nascent) MTTs. A separate depiction of MTT‐KR utilization indicated that data analysis, translational technologies, and novel methods were heavily utilized by MTTs, whereas other KRs contributed significant effort to infrastructure development. We conclude that the CTSA can provide a rich 
infrastructural framework and scientific environment for the development of successful MTTs. Clin Trans Sci 2013; Volume 6: 60–71

Toward a Theory of Change Role Efficacy

Due to a lack of research and integration of OD theory, a theoretical model of change role efficacy for organizational development is presented. As an extension of a previously developed model (White & Wooten, 1986) of change agent, client system, and mutual roles, and an integrated model of change (White & Wooten, 1985), situational change roles are illustrated as contingent upon the stage of change which is sensitive to the change agent-client system relationship. Various forms of role conflict and ambiguity are discussed in relation to their impact upon various change roles to be assumed at each stage of change. It is concluded that highly integrative and contingency-based models are neededfor the theoretical development of OD as a science, and for practical guidance of change parties.

Assessing and Evaluating Multidisciplinary Translational Teams: A Mixed Methods Approach

A case report illustrates how multidisciplinary translational teams can be assessed using outcome, process, and developmental types of evaluation using a mixed-methods approach. Types of evaluation appropriate for teams are considered in relation to relevant research questions and assessment methods. Logic models are applied to scientific projects and team development to inform choices between methods within a mixed-methods design. Use of an expert panel is reviewed, culminating in consensus ratings of 11 multidisciplinary teams and a final evaluation within a team-type taxonomy. Based on team maturation and scientific progress, teams were designated as (a) early in development, (b) traditional, (c) process focused, or (d) exemplary. Lessons learned from data reduction, use of mixed methods, and use of expert panels are explored.

The influence of cognitive style upon work environment preferences

Previous research has shown that those who differ in cognitive style differ in job satisfaction, leadership, and perceptions of task characteristics. The present study investigated how those who differ in cognitive style differ in their preferences for various work environments. The Group Embedded Figures Test and the Work Environment Scale-Form I were administered to 376 undergraduates. Analyses indicated that cognitive style was significantly associated with over-all climate perceptions as well as perceptions of autonomy, involvement, and innovation. The results suggest that those who are field-independent prefer autonomous, involving, and innovative work settings.

The Culture of Translational Science Research: Participants’ Stories

We apply a symbolic interactionist framework and a qualitative methodology to the examination of the everyday reality of translational science research (TSR). This is a growing scientific movement that aims to facilitate the efficient application of basic research to clinical service design and delivery. We describe the emerging culture of translational research at a mid-size medical center that received a Clinical and Translational Science Award from the National Institutes of Health. The stories related by scientists, clinicians, and students in interviews indicate that they make sense of the emerging inter- and cross-disciplinary, team-oriented culture of TSR through the refinement and redefinition of the significant symbols that inform their work while they attempt to master translational research by addressing the dilemmas it produces for them and their work. We see the strength, currency, adaptability, and energy of the core self-definition of “scientist” to be significant in shaping the emerging culture of translational research. We conclude by celebrating the value of interpretive ethnography for evaluation research.

Translational Science Project Team Managers: Qualitative Insights and Implications from Current and Previous Postdoctoral Experiences.

The development of leadership and project management skills is increasingly important to the evolution of translational science and team-based endeavors. Team science is dependent upon individuals at various stages in their careers, inclusive of postdocs. Data from case histories, as well as from interviews with current and former postdocs, and those supervising postdocs, indicate six essential tasks required of project managers in multidisciplinary translational teams, along with eight skill-related themes critical to their success. To optimize the opportunities available and to ensure sequential development of team project management skills, a life cycle model for the development of translational team skills is proposed, ranging from graduate trainees, postdocs, assistant professors, and finally to mature scientists. Specific goals, challenges and project management roles and tasks are recommended for each stage for the life cycle.

The innovation scorecard for continuous improvement applied to translational science

Introduction This paper reports on the baseline stage of a qualitative evaluation of the application of the Innovative Scorecard (ISC) to the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) at Galveston. The ISC is adopted from the established Balanced Scorecard system for strategic planning and performance management. In formulating the evaluation, we focused on the organizational identity literature. Methods The initial evaluation consisted of a series of semi-structured interviews with 22 participants of the ISC Boot Camp conducted in July 2015. Results The logic of grounded theory pointed to the clustering of perceptions of the ISC around respondents’ occupational locations at UTMB. Administrators anticipate the expansion of planning activities to include a wider range of participants under the current CTSA award period (2015–2020) than under our first CTSA approval period (2009–2014). A common viewpoint among the senior scientists was that the scientific value of their work will continue to speak for itself without requiring the language of business. Junior scientists looked forward to the ISC’s emphasis on increasingly horizontal leadership that will give them more access to and more control over their work and resources. Postdocs and senior staff welcomed increased involvement in the total research process at UTMB. Conclusion The report concludes with strategies for future follow-up.

Evolution of Multidisciplinary Translational Teams (MTTs): Insights for Accelerating Translational Innovations: Evolution of Multidisciplinary Translational Teams

There is growing consensus about the factors critical for development and productivity of multidisciplinary teams, but few studies have evaluated their longitudinal changes. We present a longitudinal study of 10 multidisciplinary translational teams (MTTs), based on team process and outcome measures, evaluated before and after 3 years of CTSA collaboration. Using a mixed methods approach, an expert panel of five judges (familiar with the progress of the teams) independently rated team performance based on four process and four outcome measures, and achieved a rating consensus. Although all teams made progress in translational domains, other process and outcome measures were highly variable. The trajectory profiles identified four categories of team performance. Objective bibliometric analysis of CTSA‐supported MTTs with positive growth in process scores showed that these teams tended to have enhanced scientific outcomes and published in new scientific domains, indicating the conduct of innovative science. Case exemplars revealed that MTTs that experienced growth in both process and outcome evaluative criteria also experienced greater innovation, defined as publications in different areas of science. Of the eight evaluative criteria, leadership‐related behaviors were the most resistant to the interventions introduced. Well‐managed MTTs demonstrate objective productivity and facilitate innovation.