Decision making in continuing professional development organisations during a crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early in COVID-19, continuing professional development (CPD) providers quickly made decisions about program content, design, funding and technology. Although experiences during an earlier pandemic cautioned providers to make disaster plans, CPD was not entirely prepared for this event. We sought to better understand how CPD organisations make decisions about CPD strategy and operations during a crisis. METHODS: This is a descriptive qualitative research study of decision making in two organisations: CPD at the University of Toronto (UofT) and the US-based Society for Academic Continuing Medical Education (SACME). In March 2021, using purposive and snowball sampling, we invited faculty and staff who held leadership positions to participate in semi-structured interviews. The interview focused on the individual's role and organisation, their decision-making process and reflections on how their units had changed because of COVID-19. Transcripts were reviewed, coded and analysed using thematic analysis. We used Mazmanian et al.'s Ecological Framework as a further conceptual tool. RESULTS: We conducted eight interviews from UofT and five from SACME. We identified that decision making during the pandemic occurred over four phases of reactions and impact from COVID-19, including shutdown, pivot, transition and the 'new reality'. The decision-making ability of CPD organisations changed throughout the pandemic, ranging from having little or no independent decision-making ability early on to having considerable control over choosing appropriate pathways forward. Decision making was strongly influenced by the creativity, adaptability and flexibility of the CPD community and the need for social connection. CONCLUSIONS: This adds to literature on the changes CPD organisations faced due to COVID-19, emphasising CPD organisations' adaptability in making decisions. Applying the Ecological Framework further demonstrates the importance of time to decision-making processes and the relational aspect of CPD. To face future crises, CPD will need to embrace creative, flexible and socially connected solutions. Future scholarship could explore an organisation's ability to rapidly adapt to better prepare for future crises.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".