Evaluating the achievements and impacts of EC framework programme transport projects

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present what kind of elements and evaluation methods should be included into a framework for evaluating the achievements and impacts of transport projects supported in EC Framework Programmes (FP). Further, the paper discusses the possibilities of such an evaluation framework in producing recommendations regarding future transport research and policy objectives as well as mutual learning for the basis of strategic long term planning. Methods The paper describes the two-dimensional evaluation methodology developed in the course of the FP7 METRONOME project. The dimensions are: (1) achievement of project objectives and targets in different levels and (2) research project impacts according to four impact groups. The methodology uses four complementary approaches in evaluation, namely evaluation matrices, coordinator questionnaires, lead user interviews and workshops. Results Based on the methodology testing, with a sample of FP5 and FP6 projects, the main results relating to the rationale, implementation and achievements of FP projects is presented. In general, achievement of objectives in both FPs was good. Strongest impacts were identified within the impact group of management and co-ordination. Also scientific and end-user impacts of the projects were adequate, but wider societal impacts quite modest. The paper concludes with a discussion both on the theoretical and practical implications of the proposed methodology and by presenting some relevant future research needs

The Quality of Data Obtained from Self-Completed Questionnaires in a Survey of High School Students

data quality, Greece, inconsistency, questionnaire, school surveys, self-completion,

An Empirical Study of System Improvement by Frontline Employees in Hospital Units

This paper investigates the conditions under which frontline employees take initiative to improve their work systems to prevent operational failures. Drawing on the system improvement and team learning literatures, we develop a framework of frontline system improvement and test it using survey data from 37 workgroups. We find that psychological safety--the belief that one can talk about errors without risk of punishment--and problem-solving efficacy--the belief that the organization will support employees' system improvement efforts--were positively correlated with frontline system improvement (FLSI). Surprisingly, felt responsibility was negatively associated with FLSI. These findings suggest that rather than relying on hiring motivated individuals, managers need to support employees' efforts to improve their work systems by creating a work environment where it is safe to talk about operational failures and responding to employee communication about operational failures. Doing this may result in higher levels of FLSI efforts and ultimately improve work processes.health care, system improvement, problem solving, survey research