A structural model of treatment program and individual counselor leadership in innovation transfer

• Published in: BMC health services research 2017-03, Vol.17 (1), p.230-230, Article 230
• Main Authors: Joe, George W, Becan, Jennifer E, Knight, Danica K, Flynn, Patrick M
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Absorptive capacity; Adaptability; Addictive behaviors; Attitudes; Counseling; Counselors; Delegation of authority; Diffusion of Innovation; Drug abuse; Endorsements; Health Personnel - education; Health services; Humans; Hypotheses; Innovations; Inservice Training; Juvenile justice; Leadership; Medical screening; Mental health; Models, Organizational; Organizational change; Organizational Innovation; Perceptions; Substance abuse treatment; Technological change; Technology Transfer; Training; United States; Work environment
• ISSN: 1472-6963; 1472-6963
• DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2170-y

A number of program-level and counselor-level factors are known to impact the adoption of treatment innovations. While program leadership is considered a primary factor, the importance of leadership among clinical staff to innovation transfer is less known. Objectives included explore (1) the influence of two leadership roles, program director and individual counselor, on recent training activity and (2) the relationship of counselor attributes on training endorsement. The sample included 301 clinical staff in 49 treatment programs. A structural equation model was evaluated for key hypothesized relationships between exogenous and endogenous variables related to the two leadership roles. The importance of organizational leadership, climate, and counselor attributes (particularly counseling innovation interest and influence) to recent training activity was supported. In a subset of 68 counselors who attended a developer-led training on a new intervention, it was found that training endorsement was higher among those with high innovation interest and influence. The findings suggest that each leadership level impacts the organization in different ways, yet both can promote or impede technology transfer.