组织效率的不同视角:卢旺达儿童早期发展计划的利害关系?

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Global Public Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-13 DOI:10.1080/17441692.2024.2377280
Lyndsey D McMahan, Courtenay Sprague
{"title":"组织效率的不同视角:卢旺达儿童早期发展计划的利害关系?","authors":"Lyndsey D McMahan, Courtenay Sprague","doi":"10.1080/17441692.2024.2377280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Within global health and development, dissatisfaction with nongovernmental organisations' effectiveness (NGOs) is an increasingly pervasive aspect of programming. Today, the international community no longer accepts that NGOs are doing what they claim. This change in expectations has emphasised the importance of measuring organisational effectiveness for improved health and development impact. Using New Institutionalism as a theoretical framework, we investigated how institutional norms and expectations influence the adoption of structures and processes by NGOs, and Early Childhood Development (ECD) programming effectiveness in Rwanda - since little research connects these concepts. We employed qualitative methods: 45 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group discussions. Findings revealed a misalignment of 'organizational effectiveness' across scales, from global to local. Findings stress that, effectiveness, though an expectation of the institutional environment, may not be a valid construct for NGOs, generating implications for ECD programming. Findings also indicate measurement of global health interventions generally and the notion of effectiveness specifically can yield adverse implications for ECD programming. These findings are relevant for researchers and practitioners trying to better understand organisational effectiveness for ECD programmes because they suggest that effectiveness is socially constructed and measured differently across the different scales.</p>","PeriodicalId":12735,"journal":{"name":"Global Public Health","volume":"19 1","pages":"2377280"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The varied perspectives of organisational effectiveness: What's at stake for early childhood development programmes in Rwanda?\",\"authors\":\"Lyndsey D McMahan, Courtenay Sprague\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17441692.2024.2377280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Within global health and development, dissatisfaction with nongovernmental organisations' effectiveness (NGOs) is an increasingly pervasive aspect of programming. Today, the international community no longer accepts that NGOs are doing what they claim. This change in expectations has emphasised the importance of measuring organisational effectiveness for improved health and development impact. Using New Institutionalism as a theoretical framework, we investigated how institutional norms and expectations influence the adoption of structures and processes by NGOs, and Early Childhood Development (ECD) programming effectiveness in Rwanda - since little research connects these concepts. We employed qualitative methods: 45 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group discussions. Findings revealed a misalignment of 'organizational effectiveness' across scales, from global to local. Findings stress that, effectiveness, though an expectation of the institutional environment, may not be a valid construct for NGOs, generating implications for ECD programming. Findings also indicate measurement of global health interventions generally and the notion of effectiveness specifically can yield adverse implications for ECD programming. These findings are relevant for researchers and practitioners trying to better understand organisational effectiveness for ECD programmes because they suggest that effectiveness is socially constructed and measured differently across the different scales.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12735,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Public Health\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"2377280\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2024.2377280\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2024.2377280","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在全球卫生与发展领域,对非政府组织(NGOs)工作效率的不满日益成为计划编制的一个普遍问题。如今,国际社会不再认可非政府组织所做的一切。这种期望的变化强调了衡量组织效率对提高健康和发展影响的重要性。我们以新制度主义为理论框架,调查了制度规范和期望如何影响非政府组织采用结构和程序,以及卢旺达儿童早期发展(ECD)项目的有效性--因为很少有研究将这些概念联系起来。我们采用了定性方法:45 次深入访谈和 6 次焦点小组讨论。研究结果表明,从全球到地方,"组织有效性 "在不同范围内存在错位。研究结果强调,有效性虽然是对机构环境的一种期望,但对非政府组织来说可能不是一个有效的概念,从而对幼儿发展计划产生影响。研究结果还表明,对全球健康干预措施的总体衡量和有效性概念的具体衡量可能会对幼儿发展计划产生不利影响。这些研究结果对于试图更好地了解幼儿发展计划的组织有效性的研究人员和从业人员具有重要意义,因为它们表明,有效性是由社会构建的,并且在不同的尺度上有不同的衡量标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The varied perspectives of organisational effectiveness: What's at stake for early childhood development programmes in Rwanda?

Within global health and development, dissatisfaction with nongovernmental organisations' effectiveness (NGOs) is an increasingly pervasive aspect of programming. Today, the international community no longer accepts that NGOs are doing what they claim. This change in expectations has emphasised the importance of measuring organisational effectiveness for improved health and development impact. Using New Institutionalism as a theoretical framework, we investigated how institutional norms and expectations influence the adoption of structures and processes by NGOs, and Early Childhood Development (ECD) programming effectiveness in Rwanda - since little research connects these concepts. We employed qualitative methods: 45 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group discussions. Findings revealed a misalignment of 'organizational effectiveness' across scales, from global to local. Findings stress that, effectiveness, though an expectation of the institutional environment, may not be a valid construct for NGOs, generating implications for ECD programming. Findings also indicate measurement of global health interventions generally and the notion of effectiveness specifically can yield adverse implications for ECD programming. These findings are relevant for researchers and practitioners trying to better understand organisational effectiveness for ECD programmes because they suggest that effectiveness is socially constructed and measured differently across the different scales.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Public Health
Global Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: Global Public Health is an essential peer-reviewed journal that energetically engages with key public health issues that have come to the fore in the global environment — mounting inequalities between rich and poor; the globalization of trade; new patterns of travel and migration; epidemics of newly-emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases; the HIV/AIDS pandemic; the increase in chronic illnesses; escalating pressure on public health infrastructures around the world; and the growing range and scale of conflict situations, terrorist threats, environmental pressures, natural and human-made disasters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信