École de réadaptation [School of Rehabilitation], University of Montréal, P.O. Box 6128, Station Centre-ville, Montréal, QC H3C 3J7, Canada.
Int J Integr Care. 2010 Dec 9;10:e117. doi: 10.5334/ijic.537.
Having a common vision among network stakeholders is an important ingredient to developing a performance evaluation process. Consensus methods may be a viable means to reconcile the perceptions of different stakeholders about the dimensions to include in a performance evaluation framework.
To determine whether individual organizations within traumatic brain injury (TBI) networks differ in perceptions about the importance of performance dimensions for the evaluation of TBI networks and to explore the extent to which group consensus sessions could reconcile these perceptions.
We used TRIAGE, a consensus technique that combines an individual and a group data collection phase to explore the perceptions of network stakeholders and to reach a consensus within structured group discussions.
One hundred and thirty-nine professionals from 43 organizations within eight TBI networks participated in the individual data collection; 62 professionals from these same organisations contributed to the group data collection. The extent of consensus based on questionnaire results (e.g. individual data collection) was low, however, 100% agreement was obtained for each network during the consensus group sessions. The median importance scores and mean ranks attributed to the dimensions by individuals compared to groups did not differ greatly. Group discussions were found useful in understanding the reasons motivating the scoring, for resolving differences among participants, and for harmonizing their values.
Group discussions, as part of a consensus technique, appear to be a useful process to reconcile diverging perceptions of network performance among stakeholders.
网络利益相关者拥有共同愿景是开发绩效评估流程的重要组成部分。共识方法可能是协调不同利益相关者对绩效评估框架中包含的维度的看法的可行手段。
确定创伤性脑损伤 (TBI) 网络中的各个组织在对 TBI 网络评估的绩效维度的重要性的看法上是否存在差异，并探讨小组共识会议在多大程度上可以协调这些看法。
我们使用了 TRIAGE，这是一种共识技术，结合了个体和群体数据收集阶段，以探索网络利益相关者的看法，并在结构化的小组讨论中达成共识。
来自八个 TBI 网络的 43 个组织的 139 名专业人员参与了个体数据收集；来自这些相同组织的 62 名专业人员为小组数据收集做出了贡献。基于问卷调查结果的共识程度（例如个体数据收集）较低，但在共识小组会议期间，每个网络都达成了 100%的一致意见。个人与团体赋予各维度的重要性评分和平均等级差异不大。小组讨论被证明有助于理解评分的动机，解决参与者之间的分歧，并协调他们的价值观。
作为共识技术的一部分，小组讨论似乎是协调利益相关者对网络绩效的不同看法的有效过程。
