For this week's post I want to discuss the importance of standard A8 Communication and Reporting (Yarborough et al, 2011). Two of the most important aspects of evaluation have to be communication and reporting, this being because without reporting of the findings, what is the point of the study? Communication is such an important factor because without appropriate and truthful communication the purpose and integrity of the study can be compromised. When we do not allow for the flow of communication between researchers and stakeholders to be free and open, we allow for the potential of misunderstandings and compromised values to take root. 

As a future researcher I would insist that communication between myself, other investigators and stakeholders be open. To allow stakeholders the freedom and trust to communicate with the investigators we find ourselves in the midst of trust and informed data. I really appreciate how Yarborough et al (2011) explain how this standard is necessary to valid and insightful research and assessment. 

As a professor the ideas of communication and reporting are never far from my mind. I am evaluated regularly by my students. I emphasis how communication between myself and them builds trust on both sides and allows for us to work cohesively as a team. Without their feedback and honest reporting I would not be able to grow as an instructor. Without my feedback and reporting via their grades they would not be able to grow as future practitioners. Each of these parts of the process of learning is vital to the continued success of our shared profession. 

References
Yarbrough, D. B., Shulha, L. M., Hopson, R. K., & Caruthers, F. A. (2011). The program evaluation standards: A           guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

     One of the most important groups within an organization and an assessment or evaluation of an assessment are the stakeholders. Without stakeholders organizations would cease to have purpose. Through our readings this week we take a look at several processes or standards which help us to understand various aspects of evaluation. As we continue to look at the way the OT profession continues to march towards a single point of entry, it is more crucial than ever to look at two of these standards, attention to stakeholders and negotiated purposes (Yarbrough et. al, 2011). 

     Attention to stakeholders implies how we analyze and study stakeholders within our given systems. As part of this particular project some of the most important stakeholders are the student clinicians, faculty, and consumers. By giving each of these stakeholders an opportunity to speak their opinions in a forum that can be free from retribution, we give our evaluation an opportunity to to be less skewed. As we continue to look at how the mandate will effect our profession as a whole, we will continue to look at and pay attention to the stakeholders in our community. 

     Negotiating purposes, when I see this immediately I think of how each of the various stakeholders relates to their purpose and ultimate goals. All of business and life is negotiating. Within our context each of the stakeholder groups have their own vested interests and to come to a solid and equitable compromise there will have to be negotiations. Their purposes will have to be shifted slightly to reach a common goal, what will best serve the public and continue to promote the profession. 

     When looking to the literature I found that most frequently I had to move away from directly related articles and utilize common themes across many disciplines. When we look at attention to stakeholders we see a large emphasis on businesses and non-profit organizations that have been researched in the peer-reviewed literature. Crilly and Sloan (2012) talk about how we gain significant knowledge about the inner workings and influence of stakeholders when we pay attention from the inside out. The authors infer that the best information can be extracted when we look at the organization and it's stakeholders with an inside perspective and allow that to logically inform or movements. Chung, Lin, and Yang (2012) come at the same target from a slightly different angle. The authors seek to understand how deeply entrenched stakeholders can come to meet the needs of other less invested stakeholders to make productive progress. This idea is quite fascinating as I have seen this very problem stall entire projects because two factions cannot find a plane of agreement. This article gives the reader multiple techniques to help bridge those gaps. Lastly when we look directly to education for a view on how curriculum reform affects stakeholders and the process of evaluation. Reis (2018) suggests that by looking at the stakeholder position intimately we can benefit in the longer term by being able to look back at the respective changes and track their success or failure along with those who helped form the curriculum. 

    When deciding on a second standard I chose the idea of negotiated purposes. As stated above, I believe this happens in all organizations, and in fact all of life. Karsh et. al (2016) discuss how negotiation relates directly to motivation. Often times we are faced with certain factors which push us in one direction over another. Now when we multiply those motivations by all the various stakeholders within an organization we suddenly find ourselves in a quandary. This ability to recognize and utilize our various motivations to productively move decisions forward towards common goals can be realized if we are willing to negotiate with and among our various purposes. Lastly I wanted to explore how we utilize our understanding of our sources of purpose and power within a stakeholder group. Almost every group has a defined power structure, either formal or informal, how do those members utilize their power? Stein et. al (2016) explain how powerful groups within organizations and stakeholder groups can judiciously and consciously utilize their strengths to benefit the group. 

     Each of these standards is near and dear to my core beliefs and ethics as a therapist. I see my clients and their families as stakeholders in occupational therapy. I also understand that my very position as their therapist puts me at a distinct advantage. I have the knowledge, they expect me to know things. As my profession moves towards everyone having the title Dr. we and I must be cognizant of how that title carries a certain unnamed assumption. We must respect all of the stakeholders to whom we serve and serve under. We must recognize the power that title holds and use it judiciously and respectfully for the betterment of all we treat. 

References

Chung, Lin, & Yang. (2012). How do entrenched managers handle stakeholders interests? Journal         of Multinational Financial Management,22(5), 263-277.

Crilly, D., & Sloan, P. (2012). Enterprise logic: Explaining corporate attention to stakeholders                  from the ‘inside‐out’. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), 1174-1193.

Karsh, N., Eitam, B., Mark, I., Higgins, E., & Gauthier, Isabel. (2016). Bootstrapping Agency:     

     How Control-Relevant Information Affects Motivation. Journal of Experimental                                  Psychology: General, 145(10), 1333-1350.

Reis, S. (2018). Curriculum reform: Why? What? How? and how will we know it works? Israel                Journal of Health Policy Research, 7(1), 1-4

Stein, T., Siebold, A., Van Zoest, W., & Enns, J. T. (2016). Testing the Idea of Privileged                           Awareness of Self-Relevant Information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human                      Perception and Performance, 42(3), 303-307.