@article{HarrisMaxwellO'Connoretal.2013,
  author    = {Harris, Fiona M. and Maxwell, Margaret and O'Connor, Rory C. and Coyne, James and Arensman, Ella and Andr{\´a}s, Sz{\´e}kely and Gusm{\~a}o, Ricardo and Coffey, Claire and Costa, Susana and Zoltan, Cserh{\´a}ti and Koburger, Nicole and van Audenhove, Chantal and McDaid, David and Maloney, Julia and V{\"a}rnik, Peeter and Hegerl, Ulrich},
  title     = {Developing social capital in implementing a complex intervention: a process evaluation of the early implementation of a suicide prevention intervention in four European countries},
  series = {BMC Public Health},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {BMC Public Health},
  number    = {158},
  doi       = {10.1186/1471-2458-13-158},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-122117},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Background: Variation in the implementation of complex multilevel interventions can impact on their delivery and outcomes. Few suicide prevention interventions, especially multilevel interventions, have included evaluation of both the process of implementation as well as outcomes. Such evaluation is essential for the replication of interventions, for interpreting and understanding outcomes, and for improving implementation science. This paper reports on a process evaluation of the early implementation stage of an optimised suicide prevention programme (OSPI-Europe) implemented in four European countries. Methods: The process analysis was conducted within the framework of a realist evaluation methodology, and involved case studies of the process of implementation in four European countries. Datasets include: repeated questionnaires to track progress of implementation including delivery of individual activities and their intensity; serial interviews and focus groups with stakeholder groups; and detailed observations at OSPI implementation team meetings. Results: Analysis of local contexts in each of the four countries revealed that the advisory group was a key mechanism that had a substantial impact on the ease of implementation of OSPI interventions, particularly on their ability to recruit to training interventions. However, simply recruiting representatives of key organisations into an advisory group is not sufficient to achieve impact on the delivery of interventions. In order to maximise the potential of high level 'gatekeepers', it is necessary to first transform them into OSPI stakeholders. Motivations for OSPI participation as a stakeholder included: personal affinity with the shared goals and target groups within OSPI; the complementary and participatory nature of OSPI that adds value to pre-existing suicide prevention initiatives; and reciprocal reward for participants through access to the extended network capacity that organisations could accrue for themselves and their organisations from participation in OSPI. Conclusions: Exploring the role of advisory groups and the meaning of participation for these participants revealed some key areas for best practice in implementation: careful planning of the composition of the advisory group to access target groups; the importance of establishing common goals; the importance of acknowledging and complementing existing experience and activity; and facilitating an equivalence of benefit from network participation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WolffWeikampBatinic2018,
  author    = {Wolff, Hans-Georg and Weikamp, Julia G. and Batinic, Bernad},
  title     = {Implicit Motives as Determinants of Networking Behaviors},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  number    = {411},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00411},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-189954},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In today's world of work, networking behaviors are an important and viable strategy to enhance success in work and career domains. Concerning personality as an antecedent of networking behaviors, prior studies have exclusively relied on trait perspectives that focus on how people feel, think, and act. Adopting a motivational perspective on personality, we enlarge this focus and argue that beyond traits predominantly tapping social content, motives shed further light on instrumental aspects of networking - or why people network. We use McClelland's implicit motives framework of need for power (nPow), need for achievement (nAch), and need for affiliation (nAff) to examine instrumental determinants of networking. Using a facet theoretical approach to networking behaviors, we predict differential relations of these three motives with facets of (1) internal vs. external networking and (2) building, maintaining, and using contacts. We conducted an online study, in which we temporally separate measures (N = 539 employed individuals) to examine our hypotheses. Using multivariate latent regression, we show that nAch is related to networking in general. In line with theoretical differences between networking facets, we find that nAff is positively related to building contacts, whereas nPow is positively related to using internal contacts. In sum, this study shows that networking is not only driven by social factors (i.e., nAff), but instead the achievement motive is the most important driver of networking behaviors.},
  language  = {en}
}