The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units
Abstract
This paper contributes to research on organizational learning by investigating specific learning activities undertaken by improvement project teams in hospital intensive care units and proposing an integrative model to explain implementation success. Organizational learning is important in this context because medical knowledge changes constantly and hospital care units must learn new practices if they are to provide high-quality care. To develop a model of factors affecting improvement project teams driving essential organizational learning in health care, we draw from three streams of related research—best-practice transfer (BPT), team learning (TL), and process change (PC). To test the model’s hypotheses, we collected data from 23 neonatal intensive care units seeking to implement new or improved practices. We first analyzed the frequency of specific learning activities reported by improvement project participants and discovered two distinct factors: learn-what (activities that identify current best practices) and learn-how (activities that operationalize practices in a given setting). Next, ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analyses supported three of our four hypotheses. Specifically, a high level of supporting evidence for a unit’s portfolio of improvement projects was associated with implementation success. Learn-how was positively associated with implementation success, but learn-what was not. Psychological safety was associated with learn-how, which was found to mediate between psychological safety and implementation success.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
Self-citationOrganizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113
Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm
Szulanski, G. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105 · Cited by 7,839
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079 · cited 2×
“Additionally, research has documented inconsistencies in health care practices that suggest that the quality of treatment received by different patients varies enormously (McGlynn et al. 2003, Wennberg 2002).”
BackgroundWhat Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639702300303 · Cited by 3,526
rwg: an assessment of within-group interrater agreement
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306 · Cited by 2,221
The Challenge of Innovation Implementation
Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259164 · Cited by 2,113
Disrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals
Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094828 · Cited by 1,729
Self-citationKatz, R., & Allen, T. J. (1982) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1982.tb00478.x · Cited by 1,410
Glick, W. H. (1985) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1985.4279045 · Cited by 1,286
Cited by
Psychological Safety: The History, Renaissance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305 · Cited by 2,577
Self-citationPsychological safety: a systematic review of the literature
Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001 · Cited by 1,408
Psychological Safety: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Extension
Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12183 · Cited by 1,231
Zhang, Y., Fang, Y., Wei, K.-K., & Chen, H. (2010) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.02.003 · Cited by 306
Inclusive leadership: how leaders sustain or discourage work group inclusion
Shore, L. M., & Chung, B. G. (2022) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/1059601121999580 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- Tucker, A. L., Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2007-06
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 894-907
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2139696166
- Cited by
- 545
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 37.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0692
- The paper
- Tucker, A. L., Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2007). Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0692
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.