Table 7 Comparison of high- and low-performing CSCOMs by CFIR domains and constructs
Domain | CFIR construct | High-performing CSCOMs | Low-performing CSCOMs |
|---|---|---|---|
Internal context | Implementation climate: | Perception that the CSCOMs had prepared well for PBF implementation | Staff of some CSCOMs reported that the conditions required to start the PBF were not met due to lack of equipment and infrastructure |
- Tension around change | |||
Implementation climate: | Objectives set out in the contract were, in many cases, discussed before being ratified | The objectives were hardly discussed with the rest of the staff | |
Results plans were seldom shared with the rest of the staff | |||
- Objectives and feedback | Briefing sessions were used to communicate the objectives in the results plans | ||
Implementation climate: - A learning environment | Awareness of being a single team in which each member is personally responsible for the outcomes Stronger collective commitment | Â | |
| Â | Readiness for implementation: | TDCs explained the data on the importance of PBF to the rest of the staff to motivate them | Weak leadership of TDCs; often conflictual interactions with the ASACO |
- Leadership engagement | |||
Process | Engaging | Many awareness-raising activities conducted by a team consisting of the TDC, the commune mayor and the ASACO chairman | TDCs led most of the awareness-raising sessions on their own |