Table 8.

Ratings matrix of distinguishing constructs from qualitative analysis

	Low Implementation Programs							High Implementation Programs
	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M
Intervention Characteristics
Design Quality & Packaging	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	X	+ 1	+ 2	X	−1	+ 1	+ 1*	+ 2	X	*
Inner Setting
Compatibility	+ 2	+ 1	+ 2	+ 1	+ 2	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 2	*
Access to Knowledge & Information	+ 2	0	+ 1	+ 1	X	−1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	− 1	+ 1*	*
Characteristics of Individuals
Other Personal Attributes	+ 1	M	+ 1	M	+ 1	+ 2	0	−1	+ 1	M	+ 2	− 1	X	*
Process
Executing	X	−1	+ 1*	−1	−2	− 1	−1	− 1	X	+ 1	+ 1	+ 1	− 1	**
External Change Agents	+ 1	+ 1	+ 2	M	0	X	+ 1	+ 1*	+ 2	+ 1	+ 2	M	+ 2	**
Formally Appointed External Implementation Leader	+ 1	−1	−1	−1*	M	−2	−2	−1	− 1	−1	X	−1	+ 1*	*
Other
Experience	−1	+ 1	+ 1	0	M	−2	M	+ 1	M	+ 2	+ 2	−2	+ 1	**

Key:Rating + or – indicates valence of the construct on implementation, and 1 or 2 indicates the magnitude of the construct in the program; * after the rating indicates that the construct was mixed but was slightly more positive or negative; 0 represents a neutral influence on implementation; X indicates mixed influence on implementation; M indicates missing; construct was not present in the interview; * in the final column indicates a weakly distinguishing construct; ** in the final column indicates a strongly distinguishing construct