References | 1. Barney J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 1991;17:99–120. 2. Barney J, Clarke D. Resource based theory: creating and sustaining competitive advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 3. Lockett A. Edith Penrose’s legacy to the resource-based view. Manage Decis Econ 2005;26:83–98. 4. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 1997;18:509–33. 5. Ambrosini V, Bowman C. What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management? Inter J Manag Rev 2009;11:29–49. 6. Newbert SL. Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strat Manag J 2007;28:121–46. 7. Lockett A, Thompson S, Morgenstern U. The development of the resource-based view of the firm: a critical appraisal. Inter J Manag Rev 2009;11:9–28. 8. Kraaijenbrink J, Spender J, Groen AJ. The Resource-Based View: a review and assessment of its critiques. J Manag 2010;36:349–72. 9. Propper C. Competition, incentives and the English NHS. Health Econ 2012;21:33–40. 10. Ferlie E, Ashburner L, FitzGerald L, et al. The new public management in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. 11. Porter ME, Teisberg EO. Redefining healthcare: creating value-based competition on results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2006. 12. McCLure ML, Poulin MA, Sovie MD, et al. Magnet hospitals: attraction and retention of professional nurses. Kansas City: American Academy of Nurses, 1983. 13. Bate P, Mendel P, Robert G. Organizing for quality: the improvement journeys of leading hospitals in Europe and the United States. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd, 2008. 14. Doran T, Roland M. Lessons from major initiatives to improve primary care in the United Kingdom. Health Aff 2010;29:1023–9. 15. Whittington R. What is strategy, and does it matter? London: Cengage Learning, 2001. 16. Rosner M. Economic determinants of organizational innovation. Adm Sci Q 1968;12:614–25. 17. Teece DJ. Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strat Manag J 2007;28:1319–50. 18. Bierly PE, Damanpour F, Santoro MD. The application of external knowledge: organizational conditions for exploration and exploitation. J Manag Stud 2009;46:481–509. 19. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Improv Sci 2011;6:42. 20. Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Titchen A, et al. What counts as evidence in evidence-based practice? J Adv Nurs 2004;47:81–90. 21. Scott A, Skea J, Robinson J, et al. Designing ‘interactive’ environmental research for wider social relevance. Special Briefing No. 4, ESRC Global Environmental Change Programme, 1999. 22. Novotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M. Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001. 23. Greve CH. Organisational learning from performance feedback. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 24. Bate P, Robert G. Experience-based design: from redesigning the systems around the patient to co-designing services with the patient. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:307–10. 25. Checkland P. Soft systems methodology. A thirty year retrospective. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1999. 26. Dopson S, Fitzgerald L. Knowledge to action? Evidence-based health care in context. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 27. Checkland P. Systems thinking. Systems practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1993. 28. Kontos PC, Poland BD. Mapping new theoretical and methodological terrain for knowledge translation: contributions from critical realism and the arts. Implement Sci 2009;4:1. 29. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications, 1997. 30. Yin R. Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2008. 31. Ovretveit J, Klazinga N. Learning from large-scale quality improvement through comparisons. Int J Qual Health Care 2012;24:463–9, (Advance access, published August 8th). 32. Rycroft-Malone J, Burton C. Paying attention to context in improvement research. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2010;7:121–2. 33. Lewin K. Defining the “field at a given time”. Psychol Rev 1943;50:292–310. 34. Pawson R. The science of evaluation. London: Sage Publications, 2013. 35. Ovseiko P, Heitmueller A, Davies SM, et al. Improving accountability through alignment: the role of academic health science centres and networks in England. BMC Health Serv Res 2014;14:24. 36. Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson J, Burton C, et al. Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). Implement Sci 2011;6:74. 37. Mockford C, Staniszewska S, Griffiths F, et al. The impact of patient and public involvement on UK NHS health care: a systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care 2012;24:28–38 38. Staniszeska S, Thomas V, Seers K. Patient and public involvement in the implementation of evidence into practice. Evid Based Nurs 2013;16:97. 39. Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson J, Burton C, et al. Collaborative action around implementation in Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care: towards a programme theory. J Health Serv Res Policy 2013;18:13–26. 40. Masterson P, Burton C, Rycroft Malone J, et al. Towards a programme theory for fidelity in the evaluation of complex interventions: a process evaluation of the OTCH trial. J Eval Clin Pract 2014;20:445–52. 41. Spradley JP. Participant observation. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1980. 42. Hsieh H, Shannon S. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005;15:1277–88. 43. Maryring P. Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qual Soc Res 2000;1:20. Retrieved 25 January 2014. http://www. qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1089/2386 44. Department of Health. Research governance framework for health and social care. London: Department of Health, 2005. 45. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007;19:349–57. 46. Robert G, Fulop N. The role of context in successful improvement. In: Health Foundation, eds. Perspectives on context. A selection of essays considering the role of context in successful quality improvement. London: Health Foundation, 2014:31. 47. Baker R, Camosso-Stefinovic J, Gillies C, et al. Tailored interventions to overcome identified barriers to change: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010(3):CD005470. 48. Crilly T, Jashpara A, Trenholm S, et al. Knowledge mobilisation in healthcare organisations: synthesising evidence and theory using perspectives of organisational form, resource based view of the firm and critical theory. NIHR Service Delivery and Organisation Programme, 2013. |
---|