Table 1

Analysis of variance of potential success factors across categories of success

FactorAverage answer across all categories*Distribution of factor is the same across categories of expansion (proven value)Distribution of factor is the same across categories of expansion (all)Distribution of factor is the same across categories of realised valueInterpretation and comment on secondary analysis‡
Significance†Significance†Significance†
1The initiative was designed to end once a set outcome had been achieved. −0.400.2740.1720.317
2The initiative was designed to end after defined period of time. −0.580.0110.0110.288Unsurprisingly, even projects with high-realised value finish if they are time bound.
3The initiative was designed to address an important healthcare need. 1.630.7650.7120.135
4There was public/political recognition and concern for the problem that the initiative was designed to address. 1.230.9390.660.201
5The initiative was based on a strong evidence base, and it was credible that the stated benefits could be achieved through the project plan. 1.350.6960.3550.299
6The project was sufficiently funded. 1.170.9410.4540.126
7The project had sufficient infrastructure, such as buildings, office space, materials or supplies. 1.520.9520.8420.613
8There were sufficient members of staff with the right skills to meet the requirements of the initiative. 1.420.0030.0020.013Skilled workforce is a critical success factor across all definitions of success.
9Members of staff had sufficient energy and time to dedicate to the initiative. 1.210.0330.0850.362Time and energy are critical to whether proven innovations expand.
10There was sufficient administrative support to deliver and maintain the initiative. 0.850.0130.0190.142Administrative support is critical to whether an innovation expands.
11There was sufficient technical support to deliver and maintain the initiative. 1.040.1130.1870.657
12There was sufficient educational support to deliver and maintain the initiative. 1.300.0230.0120.089Educational support is critical to whether an innovation expands.
13External political or societal factors impacted negatively on the delivery of the initiative. −0.910.1910.1410.005External political or societal factors appear critical to whether an innovation is able to realise its intended value (inconsistent exposure/response).
14It was necessary to adapt the project so that it aligned more closely with external political or societal priorities. −0.720.5410.2520.064
15We had opportunities to demonstrate the benefits of this innovation within our organisation and/or to other organisations. 1.590.2370.0530.02Unsurprisingly, innovations that were able to realise their intended value were more likely to be able to demonstrate the benefits of their innovation.
16Steps were taken to raise the profile of the initiative, for example, through media, marketing, community engagement or publications. 0.850.1080.0590.306
17There are plans to replicate this innovation at other sites or spread it to other parts of the organisation. 0.580.0240.0120.228Unsurprisingly, innovations that have become scaled up were more likely to say there were plans to spread their innovation.
18The initiative integrated well into existing organisational structures, programmes or policies. 1.260.0120.0020.059The ability of an innovation to integrate into existing organisational structures may be critical to whether it becomes scaled up.
19It was necessary to adapt the initiative so that it achieved a good fit with existing organisational structures, programmes or policies. −0.090.0530.0350.115For innovations to scale up, they may need to adapt so that they fit within existing organisational structures.
20The host organisation was ready and able to undertake the initiative. 1.550.2620.1680.721
21The initiative was hampered by opposition from within the host organisation. −1.500.0370.0270.398However valuable an innovation is, it appears unlikely to survive if it is opposed within the host organisation.
22The host organisation lacked the necessary values/culture to support and sustain the initiative. −1.170.2650.2470.888
23I was released from other duties so that I could implement this initiative. −0.430.7320.8930.789
24I had a supportive peer network that I could discuss any issues or problems with. 1.320.3850.5620.79
25I was internally motivated to implement this initiative. 1.810.4250.1290.034Innovations appear more likely to realise their value if the innovator is internally motivated.
26I found working on the initiative personally rewarding. 1.810.1470.0670.022Unsurprisingly, there is a correlation between an innovation realising its value, and the innovator finding it rewarding.
27I feel I had the right skills/experience/training to implement and sustain the initiative. 1.620.0330.0080.023The skills of the innovator appear to be a critical success factor across all definitions of success.
28I had sufficient energy and time to dedicate to the initiative. 1.060.2090.2680.498
29The project had sufficient input from experts with the necessary knowledge and experience. 1.660.1340.0180.021Expert input appears critical to both realisation of value, and to whether it expands.
30The outcomes and impact of the project were measured or assessed. 1.370.0600.1250.119
31We were able to demonstrate the effectiveness of the project. 1.380.4630.1850.015Unsurprisingly, innovations that were able to realise their intended value were more likely to be able to demonstrate the effectiveness of their innovation.
32Performance data were gathered and reported on a regular basis. 1.040.3460.2660.159
33Steps were taken to systematically improve and adapt the project. 1.440.2930.1530.377
34There was ongoing orientation and training available, for example, to new staff or to build capacity. 0.870.0340.030.153The availability of ongoing training may be critical to whether successful innovations scale up.
35Staff were given time/incentives to attend the necessary training. 0.470.0960.1590.178
36Staff were required to attend the necessary training 0.110.3480.2710.767
37The initiative was difficult or complex to deliver. −0.090.2940.1630.158
38The initiative helped to make things easier or more efficient. 0.760.860.9530.182
39The initiative did not require special or extra effort. −1.090.9790.8690.597
40I believe that the staff delivering the initiative found the work/tasks rewarding and satisfying. 1.590.3680.4560.743
41The project team worked well together. 1.740.4160.7960.893
42There were clear responsibilities for individuals the work was shared across the team. 1.450.9450.5330.066
43Project was overly dependent on a particular individual or individuals. 0.570.7080.3550.29
44I believe that the team understood what the project was trying to achieve and that it would lead to improved processes and outcomes. 1.620.2180.1650.772
45There were rewards or incentives that supported engagement with, and continued delivery of, the initiative. 0.070.450.6380.228
46The activities and roles of the initiative were incorporated into job descriptions. −0.300.290.2430.141
47Staff had time within their working hours to complete the tasks of the initiative. 0.590.2510.1380.328
48The initiative had leadership and/or champions who were committed and capable. 1.620.0030.0010.006Leadership appears to be a highly significant success factor across all definitions of success.
49There was an appropriate balance of power between those involved with the initiative. 1.150.6970.7750.929
50Team members were able to express their opinions, and their opinions were valued. 1.911 (no variance)0.0490.026Distributed decision-making may be a critical success factor across all definitions of success. It was common to all innovations of value that scaled up (hence no variance).
51There was a sense of ownership and commitment by those involved with the initiative 1.790.2840.1770.102
52Staff who were responsible for delivering the initiative were involved as partners, and were able to shape the initiative. 1.740.3060.1760.031Participatory processes with staff may be critical to the ability of a project to realise its intended value.
53The beneficiaries (patients/service users) were involved as partners, and were able to shape the initiative. 0.830.450.1390.027Participatory processes with patients/service users may be critical to the ability of a project to realise its intended value.
54The community in which it was situated was involved as partners, and was able to shape the initiative. 0.960.1770.0340.023Participatory processes on a community level may be critical to both the ability of a project to realise its value and its scalability.
55There was a collaborative network of people/organisations that helped to support and sustain the initiative. 1.300.0080.0070.003The support of a collaborative network of people/organisation may be highly significant to both value creation and scalability.
56It felt as though the initiative was imposed on us and there was little sense of ownership or commitment to the project. −1.640.6840.4880.326
  • Analysis of variance of potential success factors across categories of success.

  • *Respondents on average =agree, =somewhat agree, =neither agree nor disagree, =somewhat disagree, =disagree.

  • †Asymptotic significances are displayed. The significance level is 0.05. The darker the shading, the safer it is to reject the null hypothesis. Significance <0.05 indicates >95% certainty that the difference between categories is not random.

  • ‡Secondary analysis examined the direction of the association and the strength of effect across categories of success.