Construct validity of the interview Time Trade-Off and computer Time Trade-Off in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A cross-sectional observational pilot study

Background\ud The Time Trade-Off (TTO) is a widely used instrument for valuing preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The TTO reveals preferences for own current health (‘utilities’) on a scale anchored between death (0) and perfect health (1). Limited information on the external validity of the TTO is available. Aim of this pilot study was to examine the construct validity of both an interview TTO and a computer-based TTO in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).\ud \ud Methods\ud Thirty patients visiting the outpatient rheumatology clinic participated. Construct validity was assessed by measuring convergent and discriminative validity. Convergent validity was assessed by calculating Spearman’s correlations between the utilities obtained from the TTOs and pain, general health (rating scales), health-related quality of life (SF-36 and SF-6D) and functional status (HAQ-DI). Discriminative power of both TTO measures was determined by comparing median utilities between worse and better health outcomes.\ud \ud Results\ud Correlations of both TTO measures with HRQoL, general health, pain and functional status were poor (absolute values ranging from .05 to .26). Both TTOs appeared to have no discriminative value among groups of RA patients who had a worse or better health status defined by six health outcome measures. About one-third of respondents were zero-traders on each of the TTO measures. After excluding zero-traders from analysis, the correlations improved considerably.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud Both the interview TTO and computer TTO showed poor construct validity in RA patients when using measures of HRQol, general health, pain and functional status as reference measures. Possibly, the validity of the TTO improves when using an anchor that is more realistic to RA patients than the anchor ‘death’

A diagnostic approach to building collaborative capacity in an interagency context

Federal Acquisition Reform has consistently called for more and better collaboration among participating organizations. Experience shows, however, that inter-organizational collaboration can be difficult at best. Our research focuses on imperatives of successful collaboration and aims to assist organizations in diagnosing their collaborative capacity. Based on prior research with homeland security organizations, we offer a model of inter-organizational collaborative capacity grounded in a systems perspective. We then identify enablers and barriers that contribute to collaborative capacity. A diagnostic process based on the established practices of organization development is offered to guide the design of tailored assessments of collaborative capacity. We present a comprehensive set of both interview and survey questions, based on our model, which can be used in creating a collaborative capacity audit. The ability to diagnose collaborative capacity encourages literacy around collaboration and assists leaders in determining mechanisms for developing their organization's collaborative capacity. Finally, we describe the future plans for validating these assessment tools.-- p. iv.Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited

The Role of Metamotivation in Managing the Motivation of Others: A Leadership Perspective

A central challenge faced by leaders is effectively managing the motivation of others. Integrating past research on leadership, motivation, and regulatory focus theory, I propose that metamotivation—the process of monitoring and controlling motivational states during goal pursuit (Scholer, Miele, Murayama, & Fujita, 2018)—plays an important role in managing the motivation of others. Metamotivation research to date has focused on how people manage their own motivation, while past leadership and motivation research has tended to examine how leaders affect the motivation of followers in relatively passive ways, or the benefits and costs of leaders encouraging a single type of motivation across situations. Using a regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997) framework, I extend metamotivation beyond the context of the self and explore leaders’ metamotivational knowledge of how to flexibly manage the motivations of others. Four studies (N = 882) investigate whether leaders possess accurate metamotivational knowledge of how to actively and flexibly manage the motivation of followers in response to changing situational and task demands. Results revealed that leaders have accurate knowledge of how follower motivational orientations fit with different tasks (Study 1 and 2), and accurate knowledge of how to induce motivational states in followers in both a close-ended paradigm (Study 3) and an open-ended, spontaneous generation paradigm (Study 4). By highlighting the role of metamotivational knowledge in leadership, this research offers new insights into how people can more effectively manage the motivation of others

A Metamotivational Approach to Understanding Managers’ Beliefs About Motivationally Diverse Teams in the Domain of Regulatory Mode

Cultivating effective teams requires managers to integrate the efforts of individuals who often vary in their backgrounds, skills, and identities. One way that team members can differ from each other is in their motivational orientation, or the reasons and ways that people pursue goals. Extant literature demonstrates that the complementary nature of two regulatory mode motivational orientations (locomotion and assessment) can benefit the performance of individuals and teams. Yet relatively little is known about what managers believe about how to manage this type of motivational diversity in teams. In this dissertation, I combine insights from the literature in motivation science, team management, and diversity to propose a novel perspective on managing motivation in teams. The first part of this dissertation (Studies 1-3) examines what people believe about the role of regulatory mode motivation in teams. Study 1 demonstrates that people, on average, recognize the differential benefits of locomotion and assessment for task performance. Using complementary methodologies, Studies 2 and 3 revealed that although people perceive motivationally diverse (vs. homogenous) teams as prone to conflict (Study 2), when prompted to describe their beliefs about motivation in teams they also recognize its potential benefits (Study 3). Following this, in the second part of this dissertation (Studies 4 and 5) I draw on recent advances in the management of team diversity to examine the strategies managers use when managing motivation in teams. In both hypothetical (Studies 4A and 4B) and consequential (Study 5) contexts, managers recognized the differential utility of different kinds of management strategies and were sensitive to intrateam dynamics in motivationally diverse and homogenous teams, but did not vary their use of different kinds of management strategies when managing motivational diversity in teams. By focusing on what managers themselves believe and do when managing motivational diversity in teams, this research offers a novel perspective on an understudied area of team management with implications for the theoretical and practical study of team management

Capabilitarianisme: Capability Approach voor gevorderden

Ingrid Robeyns. Wellbeing, freedom and social justice: The capability approach re-examined. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 2017, €25,99 (print version); eBook is available open access, 268 p., ISBN 978178374421

Assessing Navy Flag-Level Command Transitions: Commanders, Command Teams, and Effectiveness

NPS NRP Technical ReportAssessing Navy Flag-Level Command Transitions: Commanders, Command Teams, and EffectivenessCommander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force (COMOPTEVFOR)This research is supported by funding from the Naval Postgraduate School, Naval Research Program (PE 0605853N/2098). https://nps.edu/nrpChief of Naval Operations (CNO)Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.