Assignment:
Institute of Management Studies (IMS)
Postgraduate Assignment Information Sheet
Professional and Applied Research Skills
Assignment information (e.g., background info, assignment question, further advice):
This assignment involves an evaluation of an intervention run in an organisation. In this assignment you are asked to critically evaluate an intervention using a strategic and evidence-based approach to evaluation.
One of the specialist skills of occupational psychologists is that of evaluating the effectiveness of interventions or processes that they, or others, have delivered. Psychologists rely on evaluation work to inform many of the choices they make in their practice. You are expected to demonstrate that you can conduct a robust evaluation of practice. Evaluation can be carried out during a project, at the end of a project and some considerable time after it has finished (i.e. as a long-term follow-up). In this assignment, data are provided for you to analyse, based on a real-world intervention.
In this assignment, you will analyse data measuring the impact of a coaching intervention designed to improve employee performance and wellbeing. The audience is the organisations senior team, who are highly competent and intelligent, but have little psychology-specific knowledge. Therefore, think about how to communicate effectively with this audience.
You will need to include some psychological theory in your report, and reference appropriately in APA format, but think carefully about balancing this with the other information required in the report.
About the Intervention
Data were collected from an ACT-based coaching intervention for senior managers in the organisation. The study design was a randomised controlled trial (RCT) design, which compared ACT-informed coaching to a waitlist control group. Surveys were distributed by email. Survey 1 was sent by email one week before the first coaching session (Time 1) and provided a baseline measure. Survey 2 was sent one week before the second coaching session (five weeks after the baseline measure; Time 2). Survey 3 was sent one week before the third coaching session (nine weeks after the baseline measure; Time 3). Survey 4 was sent four weeks after the third coaching session (14 weeks after the baseline measure; Time 4). An online research randomiser tool (www.randomizer.org) was used to randomly allocate coachees to either the experimental group or the waitlist control group.
Of the 127 participants in the sample, 90 (71%) were female, and 94 (74%) participants described their ethnicity as white. There was an age range of 26 to 60 years (mean age of 41.47 years). On average, coachees had worked in their job for between 3-4 years (mean of 3.27 years). Of the 127 coachees, 116 (91%) were educated to degree level or above.
Coachees' had three face-to-face 90-minute coaching sessions delivered over a period of nine weeks. The aim of the first session was to (a) introduce the coachee to ACT-informed coaching, and the strategies ACT approaches employ, (b) identify core work values for the coachee, (c) identify goals for the coachee to work on during the coaching programme, and (d) introduce the coachee to mindfulness practice. The three main exercises used in the session were a values clarification exercise, a goal-setting process, and a short mindfulness practice. Participants were asked to practice mindfulness between coaching sessions: Two mindfulness practices were discussed in the coaching session, and then emailed to participants following the session.
The aim of the second coaching session was to (a) review progress towards the coachee's goals, (b) review the use of mindfulness since the previous session, and (c) introduce defusion and acceptance as ways of moving past psychological blocks to progress. There were three main exercises used in the session: A mindfulness exercise focused on defusing the coachee from their thoughts, feelings and physical sensations; a defusion and acceptance exercise focused on moving beyond psychological barriers to coachees goal progress; and a metaphor designed to increase the coachees willingness to experience difficult thoughts and emotions in relation to their goals. Participants were asked to use mindfulness practices between sessions, and practice using the defusion, acceptance, and willingness exercises if they noticed psychological blocks to progress. Copies of these exercises were emailed to participants after the coaching session.
The aim of the final session was to (a) review progress towards the coachee's goals, (b) introduce the observing perspective (i.e. self-as-context perspective), and (c) encourage coachees to keep working towards their goals and increase their values consistent actions. There were two main exercises used in the session: A mindfulness exercise focusing on the observing perspective; and a values consistency exercise, which asked coachees to reflect on what they are doing day-to-day to live their values, where the inconsistencies with their values are, and what else they might be able to do to bring their values to life. Copies of these exercises were emailed to participants after the coaching session.
Following completion of the final survey, participants were emailed a handout with information to help participants move forward with their gaols and values following the coaching programme. This included (a) a short mindfulness practice; (b) a life values clarification exercise; (c) tips and suggestions for facilitating values-based living; (d) a resilience enhancing exercise; and (e) resources for learning more about ACT.
Performance was measured using the individual performance items from the Model of Positive Work Role Behaviours (Griffin et al., 2007). This scale is based on a theoretically derived model of performance, focusing on an individual's proficiency, adaptivity, and proactivity at work. All items are rated based on how often participants have carried out the behaviour over the past month on a scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (a great deal). Responses were collected as a self-report from participants. The scale consists of nine items. Participants were asked to rate how often they had carried out each behaviour over the past month on a scale ranging from 1 ("very little") to 5 (a "great deal"). An example self-report item for this scale is "Completed your core tasks well using the standard procedures". Higher scores indicate higher performance.
General mental health was measured using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12; Goldberg, 1992). This scale is a measure of current mental health; specifically the inability to carry out normal functions, and the appearance of new and distressing experiences. It consists of 12 items. An example item from this scale is "have you recently felt capable of making decisions about things?" Items are scored 0 (more so than usual) to 3 (much less than usual). Scores have been coded so higher scores indicate increased general mental health.
The Report
You need to submit a report evaluating the coaching intervention. Specifically within this report you need to:
Specify the purpose and aim of the intervention being evaluated.
Identify and critically evaluate the quality of the data available for the evaluation.
Identify the practical constraints impacting on the evaluation process.
Select appropriate evaluation processes and techniques.
Critically evaluate the quality of the evaluation methodology (e.g. reliability, validity and sensitivity of the data, sample size, timing of evaluations, rigour and appropriateness of analysis etc.).
Evaluate outcomes systematically against objectives using appropriate tools and analytical techniques.
Reach appropriate evidence-based conclusions about the outcome of the intervention (e.g. what worked, in what ways, for whom).
Reflect on the outcomes of the evaluation and the implications of these for future evidence-based and evidence-informed practice.
Provide advice and guidance to stakeholders based on the results of the evaluation.
The report should follow this structure below:
· Title
· Executive summary
· Contents page
· Introduction
· Main body
· Conclusions and recommendations
· References
· Appendices
Key/suggested references:
Barends, E., & Rousseau, D. M., (2018). Evidence-Based Management: How to Use Evidence to Make Better Organisational Decisions. Kogan Page Limited; New York, NY.
Books on statistical analysis, such as Field (2017) will be a helpful guide to running statistical analysis for this assignment.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE Publications.
Support for this assignment:
Support for this assignment will be provided throughout the course, with the following specific support sessions:
· 3x workshops on evidence-based practice and intervention evaluation, including two case studies.
· 1x workshop on progressing your report, with the opportunity for feedback from tutors on your progress so far. This formative workshop is aimed at helping students to progress their ideas, and get helpful feedback before submitting their final reports
Word limit:
1,500 words.
This includes the main body of text, in text citations [e.g. (Eisen et al., 2008)], quotations and footnotes. However, the word limit excludes your title page, tables, figures, illustrations, reference list and appendices.
Referencing style
APA Style
Attachment:- Postgraduate Information Sheet.rar