Barriers and Facilitators of Transferring Research to Practice: An Exploratory Case Study of Motivational Interviewing

Abstract

Based on Simpson's program change model, this study explored personal and organizational barriers and facilitators of transferring a research-based innovation, motivational interviewing (MI), into the practices of county-employed case managers and counselors. A mixed-method perspective was employed whereby practitioner and consumer data were gathered via focus groups, and additional practitioner data were collected by means of a 2-wave panel survey. Practitioner focus group data revealed several perceived organizational barriers related to the resource of time, whereas the consumer focus group data uncovered the potential need for practitioners to adopt a research-based technology such as MI. Correlational analyses of practitioner survey data found that the organizational resource of adequate computer equipment and the staff attributes of professional growth, efficacy, and job satisfaction facilitated intention to adopt and implement MI. Implications for human services administrators and MI trainers are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• case managers
• counselors
• mental illness
• motivational interviewing
• substance use
• technology transfer

Notes

¹ Simpson's (2002) program change model recently has been revised (see Simpson & Flynn, 2007); however, because this study was conceptualized and conducted prior to 2007, the 2002 version of the model is discussed in this article. The main difference between the models is that the 2007 version makes the personal and institutional and organizational influences more explicit (Simpson & Flynn, 2007).

² The MISC v2.0 requires two passes through each audiotape (Miller et al., 2003). In the first pass, the entire tape is played without interruption and then the global rating scales are completed. In the second pass, each practitioner and client utterance is coded based on explicit behavior classifications. Because of limited resources, only the first pass was completed in this project.

³Please contact the first author for copies of the guides.

⁴An anonymous four-digit code was used to cross-link practitioners' initial and follow-up surveys.

⁵ Of the 8 practitioners who participated in the MI training enhancements, 6 submitted practice tapes and 2 participated in individual coaching sessions.

⁶ The TCU ORC–SA is a version of the Texas Christian University Organizational Readiness for Change Treatment–Staff Version (TCU ORC–S) and was designed for use in social service agencies where practitioners do not provide treatment services directly (TCU ORC–SA, 2003). Although some of the practitioners who participated in this study provide such services, the majority either employ case management or case management in addition to treatment or counseling services. Therefore, the TCU ORC–SA instead of the TCU ORC–S was used in this study.