Home » NPT Toolkit

NPT Toolkit

This is the NPT toolkit. To understand how to use it, click here, for an explanation and a powerpoint presentation that you can download and use collaboratively.

1. Participants distinguish the intervention from current ways of working.

Whether the intervention is easy to describe to participants and whether they can appreciate how it differs or is clearly distinct from current ways of working.

2. Participants collectively agree about the purpose of the intervention.

Whether participants have or are able to build a shared understanding of the aims, objectives, and expected outcomes of the proposed intervention.

3. Participants individually understand what the intervention requires of them.

Whether individual participants have or are able to make sense of the work – specific tasks and responsibilities - the proposed intervention would create for them.

4. Participants construct potential value of the intervention for their work.

Whether participants have or are able to easily grasp the potential value, benefits and importance of the intervention.

5. Key individuals drive the intervention forward

Whether or not key individuals are able and willing to get others involved in the new practice.

6. Participants agree that the intervention should be part of their work.

Whether or not participants believe it is right for them to be involved, and that they can make a contribution to the implementation work.

7. Participants buy in to the intervention.

The capacity and willingness of participants to organize themselves in order to collectively contribute to the work involved in the new practice.

8. Participants continue to support the intervention.

The capacity and willingness of participants to collectively define the actions and procedures needed to keep the new practice going.

9. Participants’ perform the tasks required by the intervention.

Whether people are able to enact the intervention and operationalise its components in practice.

10. Participants maintain their trust in each other’s work and expertise through the intervention.

Whether people maintain trust in the intervention and in each other.

11. The work of the intervention is appropriately allocated to participants.

Whether the work required by the intervention is seen to be parcelled out to participants with the right mix of skills and training to do it.

12. The intervention is adequately supported by its host organization.

Whether the intervention is supported by management and other stakeholders, policy, money and material resources.

13. Participants access information about the effects of the intervention.

Whether participants can determine how effective and useful the intervention is from the use of formal and/or informal evaluation methods.

14. Participants collectively assess the intervention as worthwhile.

Whether, as a result of formal monitoring, participants collectively agree about the worth of the effects of the intervention.

15. Participants individually assess the intervention as worthwhile.

Whether individuals involved with, or affected by, the intervention, think it is worthwhile.

16. Participants modify their work in response to their appraisal of the intervention.

Whether individuals or groups using the intervention can make changes as a result of individual and communal appraisal.

Results

The Radar Plots show the strength that you have assigned to each variable. Use them as heuristic tools to think through an implementation or integration process. Positive responses extend further out from the centre than negative ones. Look for areas where the responses are closer to the centre. These may tell you that participants cannot make sense, or have not signed up to the innovation. Perhaps they cannot enact it in a way that works for them, or cannot assess its effects and their value. If the responses are positive, the opposite may be true.

Results graph

Sense-making

Results graph

  1. Sufficient organizational effort has gone into supporting the ehealth system
  2. In using the ehealth system, the quality of professional and patient interaction is good
  3. In using the ehealth system, I understand my accountability for my work
  4. In using the ehealth system, responsibilities are divided between individuals appropriately

Participation

Results graph

  1. The staff who work here have a shared understanding of what the system is for and how it is to be used
  2. This ehealth system is technically and organizationally compatible with other systems and agencies that we are required to work with
  3. This ehealth system fits in with the priorities and challenges of our organization
  4. The skills needed to use the ehealth system are easily learned

Action

Results graph

  1. Using the ehealth system makes me feel autonomous in my work
  2. There is a culture in this organization of involving staff in planning and development
  3. This organization has a culture that is supportive of change
  4. The staff here are committed to making the system work

Monitoring

Results graph

  1. Using the ehealth system leads to positive outcomes for patients
  2. In using the ehealth system, I understand my liability for my practice
  3. There is some flexibility in how the ehealth system can be used
  4. There are ongoing mechanisms for monitoring and appraising how this ehealth system is used
Question

    Tell us what you think

    How to cite this content

    May, C., Murray, E., Finch, T., Mair, F., Treweek, S., Ballini, L., Macfarlane, A. and Rapley, T. (2010) Normalization Process Theory On-line Users’ Manual and Toolkit. Available from http://www.normalizationprocess.org [Accessed on ].