Search results

The purpose of this study is to target utilizing Human resources (HRs) data analytics that may enhance strategic business, but little study has examined how it affects components. Data analytics, HRM and strategic business require empirical investigations and how to over come HR data analytics implementation issues.

A semi-systematic methodology for its evaluation allows for a more complete examination of the literature that emerges theoretical framework and a structured survey questionnaire for quantitative data collection from IT sector personnel. SPSS analyses data.

Future research is essential for organisations to exploit HR data analytics’ performance-enhancing potential. Data analytics should complement human judgment, not replace it. This paper details these transitions, the important contributions to theory and practice and future research.

Data analytics has grown rapidly and might make HRM practices faster, more efficient and data-driven. HR data analytics may improve strategic business. HR data analytics on employee retention, engagement and organisational success is insufficient. HR data analytics may boost performance, but there is limited proof. The authors do not know how HRM data analytics influences firms and employees.

Data analytics offers HRM new opportunities, along with technical and ethical challenges. This study makes a significant contribution to HR data analytics, evidence-based practice and strategic business literature. In addition to estimating turnover risk, identifying engagement factors and planning interventions to increase retention and engagement, HR data analytics can also estimate the risk of employee attrition.

A topic currently receiving significant academic and practitioner attention is called evidence-based management. The purpose of this paper is to suggest that this approach is sometimes over-sold and may be a fad. Additionally, evidence-based management fails to fully recognize the importance of tacit knowledge, what Kahneman calls system 1. Evidence-based management does provide tools to better use what Kahneman calls system 2, rationality. Decision-makers need to take advantage of both rational and beyond rational processes.

This is an essay, it is not a report of a study. At this point in time, this paper needs thinking, reflection, pondering, more than a data-based study.

Advocates promote evidence-based management in part to help avoid fads, yet evidence-based management itself has many of the characteristics of a fad. Evidence-based management is based on an objective rational view of the world and suggests highly rational methods of decision-making. However, a rational fact-based might not give sufficient credit to instinct and feelings. Decision-makers should take into account facts, evidence, when making decisions, but not ignore intuition, hunches and feelings. This study is learning that decisions use a galaxy of approaches, with both cognitive and affective flexibility.

As with any opinion-based paper, this lacks empirical support. Proponents ask us to believe in evidence-based management. Neither we, the authors of this paper, nor the proponents of evidence-based management can empirically support the ideas offered. An additional limitation is that the paper is written in one language, English. Translation into another language might yield different meanings.

There are advantages for scholars and practitioners to look at the best available evidence. There can be disadvantages in overlooking non-quantifiable factors.

Those who use evidence-based management should also take into account feelings, ethics, aesthetics, creativity, for the betterment of society. To solve wicked problems one needs more than facts and rational analysis.

The overwhelming majority of those writing about evidence-based management are supporters. This study offers a different view. This paper brings new ideas and new thinking to both the extensive fad literature and the huge evidence-based management literature. Evidence-based management is discussed widely. Google Scholar lists more than two million papers in 2019, 2020 and 2021 on evidence-based management. Readers of this journal should critically evaluate this popular set of ideas.

Research and experience show that evidence-based practice (EBP), i.e. using the best available knowledge in daily professional work, is difficult to achieve in social services. The purpose of this study is to understand the development of organizational EBP learning processes in daily work through workplace education for staff and managers of supported homes for people with cognitive disabilities. The authors examine how the EBP model and new knowledge are understood and made actionable in the workplace, applying theories of organizational learning.

The authors used empirical material collected from an EBP workplace education pilot in Sweden, as well as documents on national EBP implementation in Swedish social services. Before the pilot, a focus group interview was conducted with regional senior managers. Participating managers and staff were individually interviewed two to three years after the pilot.

The study illustrates how knowledge-based action emerged from education where EBP was interpreted, understood, reflected on, and tested, supported by codified EBP tools in the work context. The participants, when supervised, and when observing and questioning their own behaviors in practice, contributed to double-loop learning (DLL) processes. Codification of EBP knowledge into useful tools and socialization processes during education and workplace meetings was crucial in developing individual and group DLL and knowledge-based actions.

The bottom-up approach to EBP development and the adaptive contextual learning at the workplace gave new insights into organizational learning in social service workplaces.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the evidence-based research strategy (EBRS) used to evaluate eight projects that applied the neighborhood approach for disaster risk reduction (NA-DRR) in informal urban settlements in Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica and Peru, between 2012 and 2017.

The study covers the first five of the seven EBRS stages: first, identify relevant interventions; second, prepare evaluation questions; third, select evidence sources and implement a search strategy; fourth, appraise evidences and identify gaps; fifth, create an evaluation design to include an extensive literature review, followed by a mixed research method with surveys, focus groups and interviews; disaster risk modeling; georeferencing analysis; and engineering inspections. The last two stages: sixth, apply the evidence, and seventh, evaluate the evidence application, will be addressed in a near future.

Even though the reference to “evidence” is frequent in the DRR field, it is largely based on descriptive processes, anecdotal references, best practices, lessons learned and case studies, and particularly deficient on the subject of informal and precariousness settlements. The evaluation allowed a deep and broad analysis of NA-DRR in urban informal settlements, comparing it with other DRR strategies implemented by different stakeholders in fragile urban settings, assessing the effectiveness and sustainability of the various DRR interventions.

The abundant data, information and knowledge generated will serve as foundation for forthcoming thematic peer-reviewed publications informing evidence-based DRR research, policy and practice, with emphasis on informal and precariousness settlements in particular.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the necessity of practicing Evidence-based Management (EBMgt) as an approach to decision-making in hospital settings. The literature, however, provides limited insight into the process of EBMgt and its contextual nuances. Such insight is critical for better leveraging EBMgt in practice. Therefore, the authors' aim was to integrate the literature on the process of EBMgt in hospital settings, identify the gaps in knowledge and delineate areas for future research.

The authors conducted a systematic scoping review using an innovative methodology that involved two systematic searches. First using EBMgt terminology and second using terminology associated with the EBMgt concept, which the authors derived from the first search.

The authors identified 218 relevant articles, which using content analysis, they mapped onto the grounded model of the EBMgt process; a novel model of the EBMgt process developed by Sahakian and colleagues. The authors found that the English language literature provides limited insight into the role of managers' perceptions and motives in EBMgt, the practice of EBMgt in Global South countries, and the outcomes of EBMgt. Overall, this study’s findings indicated that aspects of the decision-maker, context and outcomes have been neglected in EBMgt.

The authors contributed to the EBMgt literature by identifying these gaps and proposing future research areas and to the systematic review literature by developing a novel scoping review method.

Calls for the development and dissemination of evidence-based programs to support children and families have been increasing for decades, but progress has been slow. This paper aims to argue that a singular focus on evaluation has limited the ways in which science and research is incorporated into program development, and advocate instead for the use of a new concept, “scientific accompaniment,” to expand and guide program development and testing.

A heuristic is provided to guide research–practice teams in assessing the program’s developmental stage and level of evidence.

In an idealized pathway, scientific accompaniment begins early in program development, with ongoing input from both practitioners and researchers, resulting in programs that are both effective and scalable. The heuristic also provides guidance for how to “catch up” on evidence when program development and science utilization are out of sync.

While implementation models provide ideas on improving the use of evidence-based practices, social service programs suffer from a significant lack of research and evaluation. Evaluation resources are typically not used by social service program developers and collaboration with researchers happens late in program development, if at all. There are few resources or models that encourage and guide the use of science and evaluation across program development.