Recent discussions in system dynamics have raised questions about the scientific acceptability of system dynamics and impact of system dynamics on social problems. This paper describes two different projects in the area of mental health services research—a research study recognized for its science and a consulting project making an impact on the policy process—and the institutional structures forming the university-agency-state partnerships. Together, the two projects helped create a community with greater awareness of system dynamics, interest in asking new questions from a system dynamics perspective, and motivation to pursue additional system dynamics projects related to research and policy. Key features of the individual projects, Center for Mental Health Services Research, Alliance for Building Capacity, and the community are discussed. The paper concludes with implications for future work in mental health services research and system dynamics in the nonprofit sector.

Advertisement Journals Books Search Menu Menu Navbar Search Filter Social Work Research and AbstractsThis issueNASW Family Social WorkBooksJournalsOxford Academic Mobile Microsite Search Term Search Sign In Issues About About Social Work Research and Abstracts About the National Association of Social Workers About the National Association of Social Workers Press Journals Career Network Journals on Oxford Academic Books on Oxford Academic NASW Family Issues About About Social Work Research and Abstracts About the National Association of Social Workers About the National Association of Social Workers Press Journals Career Network Close Navbar Search Filter Social Work Research and AbstractsThis issueNASW Family Social WorkBooksJournalsOxford Academic Microsite Search Term Search Advanced Search Search Menu Article Navigation Close mobile search navigation Article Navigation Volume 23 Issue 3 Fall 1987 Next > Article Navigation Article Navigation Journal Article A General Formula for Computing Total Scores Using Scales with Incomplete Items Get access John G. Orme, John G. Orme School of Social Work, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar David F. Gillespie David F. Gillespie George Warren Brown, School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 83130 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Social Work Research and Abstracts, Volume 23, Issue 3, Fall 1987, Page 3, https://doi.org/10.1093/swra/23.3.3 Published: 01 October 1987 Article history Accepted: 31 July 1985 Published: 01 October 1987 Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Cite Cite John G. Orme, David F. Gillespie, A General Formula for Computing Total Scores Using Scales with Incomplete Items, Social Work Research and Abstracts, Volume 23, Issue 3, Fall 1987, Page 3, https://doi.org/10.1093/swra/23.3.3 Select Format Select format .ris (Mendeley, Papers, Zotero) .enw (EndNote) .bibtex (BibTex) .txt (Medlars, RefWorks) Download citation Close Permissions Icon Permissions Share Email Twitter Facebook More Navbar Search Filter Social Work Research and AbstractsThis issueNASW Family Social WorkBooksJournalsOxford Academic Mobile Microsite Search Term Search Sign In Close Navbar Search Filter Social Work Research and AbstractsThis issueNASW Family Social WorkBooksJournalsOxford Academic Microsite Search Term Search Advanced Search Search Menu Article PDF first page preview Close This content is only available as a PDF. © 1987 by the National Association of Social Workers, Inc.© 1987 by the National Association of Social Workers, Inc. Issue Section: Research Note You do not currently have access to this article. Download all slides Sign in Get help with access National Association of Social Workers members Sign in through society site Personal account Get email alerts Save searches Purchase content Activate purchases and trials Sign in Register Institutional access Sign in through your institution Sign in with a library card Sign in with username / password Recommend to your librarian Institutional account management Sign in as administrator Get help with access Institutional access Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways: IP based access Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account. Sign in through your institution Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth / Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic. Click Sign in through your institution. Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in. When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account. Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic. If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator. Sign in with a library card Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian. Society Members Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways: Sign in through society site Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal: Click Sign in through society site. When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account. Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic. If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society. Sign in using a personal account Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below. Personal account A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions. Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. Viewing your signed in accounts Click the account icon in the top right to: View your signed in personal account and access account management features. View the institutional accounts that are providing access. Signed in but can't access content Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian. Institutional account management For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more. Close access help modal Purchase Subscription prices and ordering for this journal Purchasing options for books and journals across Oxford Academic Short-term Access To purchase short term access, please sign in to your Oxford Academic account above. Don't already have an Oxford Academic account? Register A General Formula for Computing Total Scores Using Scales with Incomplete Items - 24 Hours access EUR €30.00 GBP £22.00 USD $39.00 Rental This article is also available for rental through DeepDyve. Advertisement Citations Views 4 Altmetric More metrics information × Email alerts Article activity alert Advance article alerts New issue alert Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic Citing articles via Google Scholar Crossref Latest Most Read Most Cited Social worker burnout: A longitudinal study Improving Research Writing Measuring Attitudes toward Poverty: A New Scale Counting the rural homeless population: Methodological dilemmas Coping strategies and the maintenance of change after inpatient alcoholism treatment More from Oxford Academic Social Sciences Social Work Books Journals Advertisement Advertisement About Social Work Research and Abstracts Facebook Twitter Journals Career Network Print ISSN 0148-0847 Copyright © 2022 National Association of Social Workers About Oxford Academic Publish journals with us University press partners What we publish New features Authoring Open access Purchasing Get help with access Institutional account management Accessibility Contact us Advertising Media enquiries Legal and policy Oxford University Press News Oxford Languages Epigeum University of Oxford Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide Copyright © 2022 Oxford University Press Cookie policy Privacy policy Legal notice

A number of clinical outcome measures based on individualized sets of client problems have been shown to be very useful in recent years. When such measures are employed, category schemes to organize these individualized problems are necessary for purposes of data analysis and presentation. Such category schemes must be reliable and valid. Questions of the psychometric adequacy of available category schemes have been virtually ignored. The study reported in this article, however, examined a range of issues concerning reliability and bias as exemplified in the use of one such category scheme.

This research reports on a survey conducted with 183 protective service workers in the state of Michigan. These practitioners listed 166 separate statements representing primary dissatisfactions or frustrations with being a child protective caseworker. Such dissatisfaction was assumed to underly the various dimensions of burnout. The statements were collated and synthesized through a version of the constant comparative method which resulted in three basic categories reflecting perceived causes of burnout: (a) overloaded responsibility, (b) lack of recognition, and (c) poor communication. The three categories are interrelated and together they point to workers' dissatisfaction with their supervisors as one of the major sources of burnout. The paper also includes a brief discussion of four ways to reduce or prevent worker burnout: reduce the client-to-staff ratio, shorten the number of work hours, change the function of staff meeting, and provide in-service training.

A model combining structural and interorganizational causes of the decentralization of decision-making was constructed to investigate the merits of intra versus interorganizational determinants of decentralization in organizations. Relationships in the model were estimated with data from a sample of American corporations. The estimated parameters of the model, despite high zero-order correlations for all relationships, suggested a more parsimonious explanation of decentralization than is currently offered by existing research literature. Findings partially confirm and refute past research which has sought solely environmental or structural explanations. More important, the findings integrate and render some past findings consistent. It is concluded that decentralization of decision-making in corporations is more the consequence of geographical dispersion and coalition formation than other aspects of structure, size, and other features of interorganizational relations, such as competition. These latter factors appear to affect decentralization only indirectly and then through the geographical dispersion of a corporation. An adequate explanation of decentralization, therefore, requires a multidimensional approach that includes both inter and intraorganizational causes. Along with other recent work, this study offers additional evidence of the major theoretical importance of geographical differentiation, an often ignored concept, in understanding complex organizations.

Journal Article Differentiation in Organizations: A Comment on Miller and Conaty Get access David F. Gillespie, David F. Gillespie Washington University Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Dennis S. Mileti Dennis S. Mileti Colorado State University Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Social Forces, Volume 60, Issue 4, June 1982, Pages 1172–1175, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/60.4.1172 Published: 01 June 1982

The utility of heterogeneous versus homogeneous samples in comparative organizational research is appraised through a path analytic comparison of the relationships between organizational size, spatial, vertical and horizontal differentiation established with samples representing different degrees of homo-heterogeneity. A causal model is estimated on data of 115 business and government organizations. The estimated parameters of the model are compared to those of Blau and Schoenherr based on a homogeneous sample of employment agencies, and Mileti, Gillespie, and Haas's sample of mixed government agencies. The findings suggest the potential utility of increasing our use of heterogeneous samples in comparative organizational research.

The dynamics of status concordance theory are explored in a heterogeneous sample of 67 ongoing interdisciplinary research teams in universities. This theory implies positive relationships between concordance and coordination, coordination and success, and a positive but spurious correlation between concordance and success. Our findings show coordination posi-tively related to success at all stages of team development; concordance positively related to coordination only during early phases of team develop-ment; concordance positively related to success for young teams, unrelated for middle-aged teams, and negatively related for older teams. These patterns remain with coordination statistically controlled. We conclude that status concordance can depress as well as elevate a team's overall success, and that external status criteria play a decreasingly important role in the co-ordination of interdisciplinary teams.

Two models of organization-environment relations are examined. One postulates organizational structure or behavior as contingent on environments; organizations are viewed as adapting to environmental changes. Conversely, the second model postulates environments as dependent upon organizations; organizations are viewed as actively manipulating environments. The two alternative models are empirically assessed and compared on a heterogeneous sample of 27 business corporations. In the contingency model, environmental manipulation is used to predict different dimensions of organizational technology. In the action model, the causal order is reversed; technology is used to predict environmental manipulation. Organizational assets are controlled in both models to eliminate the possible bias of differential resources. We find similar predictive power for both models. Explained variance was about equal, and standardized regression coefficients were similar across the models as well. It is thus concluded that a full understanding of organization-environment interaction will require simultaneous consideration of their effects upon one another.

The relationship between complex organizations and technology is a matter of increasing importance. Its importance derives from the recognition that modern society is increasingly an organizational society and also a technological society.' Historians, sociologists, social psychologists, and economists have produced an impressive literature documenting the nature and degrees of technological change. But, due to the involvement of different disciplines, as well as the elusive and complex nature of both technology and organizations, research findings regarding technology in the study of organizations have been inconsistent and inconclusive, and they have remained scattered in a diverse literature.