In Search of Evidence

General Introduction
evidence on management interventions? Chapter 4 therefore provides several
examples of how the internal validity of scientific evidence in the field of management
might be increased. The examples in this chapter are based on the studies that were
identified by the systematic review discussed in chapter 3.
Question 4: What is the added value of a rapid assessment of the scientific evidence on
a specific topic for managers and organizations?
The outcome of the systematic review described in chapter 3 left me with a sense
of disappointment: it suggested that practitioners should, in general, be skeptical
regarding the trustworthiness of scientific evidence relating to organizational change
management. In fact, it implied that one of the most important pillars of evidencebased
management — the body of scientific evidence — was rather weak and that its
added value for practice was therefore limited. Even taking into account the concept
of ‘best available’ evidence, this outcome was disturbing. The question therefore was
whether the findings of the systematic review on change management interventions
could be generalized to the domain of management in general, or if there was room
for optimism? An opportunity to answer this question occurred in summer 2013, when
a group of eight large companies wanted to understand what academic research had
discovered about the determinants of knowledge worker performance. For each
company the pay off for enhancing knowledge worker performance would be huge,
not only in terms of finance, but also in terms of innovation, which for some
participants was a key success factor for long-term profitability and growth. Although
all organizations used various measures and controls to monitor and enhance
performance, they lacked a basic understanding of what really drives knowledge
worker performance. For this reason, the organizations commissioned a rapid evidence
assessment (REA) of the scientific evidence on knowledge worker performance. The
outcome of this REA is discussed in chapter 5.
Question 5: How can managers critically appraise the trustworthiness of scientific
evidence such as meta-analyses or systematic reviews?
Meta-analyses and systematic reviews are strongly promoted by the evidence-based
practice movement because they are regarded as the most trustworthy and
authoritative form of evidence. As chapter 5 demonstrates, such research is widely
available, even in management. However, the results of a meta-analysis or systematic
review may still provide an extremely biased view, if the way in which the study is
conducted contains serious flaws. In light of the weight attached to meta-analyses and
systematic reviews it is therefore important for managers to be capable of evaluating