Nov 29, 2025
Systematic Framework Development for Organizational Analysis in Complex Institutional Environments
- Nabil Zary1
- 1Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences
- NeuroInk
Protocol Citation: Nabil Zary 2025. Systematic Framework Development for Organizational Analysis in Complex Institutional Environments. protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.6qpvrwj5blmk/v1
License: This is an open access protocol distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it's working
Created: November 29, 2025
Last Modified: November 29, 2025
Protocol Integer ID: 233782
Keywords: systematic literature synthesis, framework development, organizational analysis, thematic analysis, mission-driven design, implementation science, economic analysis, organizational models within academic health system, systematic framework development for organizational analysis, institutional missions to essential service, complex institutional setting, complex institutional environment, institutional setting, academic health system, complex institutional environments this protocol, organizational analysis, institutional mission, systematic framework development, organizational structure, organizational design, organizational model, organizational theory, specific guidance for organizational decision, making in complex institutional setting, application of organizational theory, different organizational option, established qualitative research method, organizational decision, qualitative research method, systematic review of literature, systematic review, analysis as the core principle, analytical framework, based
Abstract
This protocol outlines a structured approach to developing evidence-based analytical frameworks that support organizational decision-making in complex institutional settings where multiple models exist, with no clear evidence of one being superior. The seven-step process combines a systematic review of literature from both academic and gray sources, thematic analysis based on established qualitative research methods, application of organizational theory as analytical perspectives rather than strict templates, economic modeling to compare costs and benefits of different organizational options, and iterative refinement of the framework through expert feedback. Its key contribution is emphasizing mission-driven analysis as the core principle for organizational design, proposing that organizational structure should be systematically derived from institutional missions to essential services, service delivery needs, and enabling structures. This positions organizational structure as a dependent variable shaped by mission requirements, not an independent choice based on theory, peer imitation, or convenience. Initially tested in the context of library organizational models within academic health systems, this protocol offers a flexible approach suitable for various professional and institutional settings where practitioners require systematic, context-specific guidance for organizational decisions rather than universal solutions.
Guidelines
This protocol enables researchers to develop evidence-based analytical frameworks for organizational decision-making in complex institutional environments. The methodology is particularly suited for contexts where: (1) multiple organizational models exist without clear evidence of superiority; (2) institutional context significantly influences organizational effectiveness; (3) practical guidance for practitioners is needed; and (4) existing literature is primarily descriptive rather than analytical.
Materials
- Reference management software (e.g., Zotero, EndNote, Mendeley)
- Qualitative analysis software (e.g., NVivo, Atlas.ti, or manual coding system)
- Spreadsheet software for economic modeling
- Access to academic databases (discipline-specific and interdisciplinary)
- Estimated time: 4-8 months for comprehensive framework development
Troubleshooting
Before start
Prerequisites
Research Team Capabilities:
- Expertise in systematic literature review methodology
- Familiarity with qualitative thematic analysis approaches
- Domain knowledge in the organizational context under study
- Basic economic analysis and cost modeling capabilities
- Access to relevant databases and gray literature sources
Required Resources:
- Reference management software (e.g., Zotero, EndNote, Mendeley)
- Qualitative analysis software (e.g., NVivo, Atlas.ti, or manual coding system)
- Spreadsheet software for economic modeling
- Access to academic databases (discipline-specific and interdisciplinary)
- Estimated time: 4-8 months for comprehensive framework development
Expected Results
Following this protocol should yield:
- Comprehensive characterization of organizational models in the domain under study
- Mission-driven analytical framework for organizational decision-making
- Economic analysis comparing costs and value generation across models
- Practical decision tools for institutional leaders
- Implementation guidance grounded in change management principles
- Documentation enabling replication and adaptation for other contexts
Define Research Questions and Scope
2h
Formulate Primary Research Questions
Develop research questions that address organizational model characterization, contextual factors influencing effectiveness, and practical guidance needs. Questions should be specific enough to guide literature searching while broad enough to capture organizational complexity.
Example question types:
- What organizational models exist in [context], and what factors Influence their effectiveness?
- How can organizational principles from [related field] inform Organizational design in [target context]?
- How can organizations structure services to support [specific stakeholder requirements]?
- What principles enable mission-driven organizational design applicable across diverse contexts?
2h
Establish Scope and Delimitations
Establish clear boundaries for organizational types, institutional contexts, geographic scope, and time periods. Clearly document these delimitations to enable future users to assess the transferability of the findings.
Identify Stakeholder Groups
Map all stakeholder groups whose needs the framework must address.
For each group, identify: primary information needs, service requirements, organizational positioning
implications, and potential conflicts with other stakeholder interests.
Systematic Literature Synthesis
3d 8h
Database Selection
Select databases appropriate to the organizational domain under study. Include both discipline-specific databases and interdisciplinary sources to capture organizational research from multiple perspectives.
Recommended database categories:
- Domain-specific databases (e.g., PubMed for health, ERIC for education)
- Library and information science databases (e.g., LISTA, Library Literature)
- Interdisciplinary databases (Web of Science, Scopus)
- Business and management databases for organizational theory
- Gray literature sources (professional associations, institutional reports)
3d 8h
Search Strategy Development
Develop a search strategy using three conceptual blocks combined with Boolean operators:
- Concept 1 - Organizational unit type: Terms describing the organizational unit under study (e.g., "academic health sciences library" OR "medical library")
- Concept 2 - Organizational elements: Terms describing organizational structure (e.g., organization* OR structure* OR governance OR "service model*")
- Concept 3 - Institutional context: Terms describing the broader institutional environment (e.g., "academic health system*" OR "teaching hospital*")
Combined search: (Concept 1) AND (Concept 2) AND (Concept 3)
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Establish explicit criteria before screening begins. Document the requirements in the protocol to ensure consistent application.
Typical inclusion criteria:
- Focus on the organizational unit type under study
- Addresses organizational structure, governance, or service delivery models
- Published within a defined time period (typically 15-25 years)
- Peer-reviewed articles, organizational reports, or institutional documents
Typical exclusion criteria:
- Outside organizational context under study
- Focus solely on technical operations without organizational implications
- Opinion pieces without substantive organizational analysis
Study Selection Process
Conduct selection in phases with documented decisions:
- Phase 1 - Initial search and deduplication: Combine searches across databases, export to reference management system, remove duplicates
- Phase 2 - Title and abstract screening: Two independent reviewers screen all titles/abstracts against inclusion criteria; resolve disagreements through discussion
- Phase 3 - Full-text assessment: Retrieve full texts, assess eligibility independently, document exclusion reasons
- Phase 4 - Citation chaining: Review reference lists of included studies, conduct forward citation searching for key articles
Data Extraction
Extract data using a standardized form, including:
- Bibliographic information (authors, year, title, source, country/region)
- Institutional context (organization type, size, programs, geographic distribution)
- Organizational model description (reporting structure, governance, budget sources)
- Service portfolio and stakeholder groups served
- Outcomes, success factors, and challenges reported
- Transferable insights and lessons learned
Thematic Analysis
1d 16h
Phase 1: Familiarization
- Read all included studies in full at least once
- Document initial observations and patterns in research notes
- Create preliminary memos on recurring themes and concepts
Phase 2: Generating Initial Codes
- Develop an initial coding framework with both deductive codes (derived from research questions) and inductive codes (emerging from data)
- Apply codes systematically to all extracted data using qualitative analysis software
- Maintain codebook with definitions and examples.
Example coding categories:
• Organizational models (independent, integrated, hybrid, distributed)
• Service delivery patterns (centralized, distributed, hub-spoke)
• Stakeholder groups and needs
• Success factors and enablers
• Challenges and barriers
Phases 3-4: Searching for and Reviewing Themes
- Group codes into potential themes using visual mapping
- Check themes against coded data for coherence and distinctiveness
- Refine theme boundaries through iterative review
- Create a thematic map showing relationships between themes
Phases 5-6: Defining Themes and Reporting
- Develop a detailed description of each theme with sub-themes
- Determine how themes relate to research questions
- Select illustrative examples for each theme
- Synthesize findings into a narrative, connecting themes to framework development
Framework Development
1d 16h
Initial Framework Conceptualization
- Synthesize organizational models identified through literature synthesis
- Identify key decision factors affecting model selection
- Map stakeholder considerations to organizational structures
- Develop a preliminary framework structure with major components
Organizational Theory Integration
Apply relevant organizational theories as analytical lenses (not prescriptive templates):
- Stakeholder theory: Analyze how different structures serve different stakeholder interests
- Resource dependency theory: Examine how structures reflect resource dependencies
- Institutional theory: Consider how structures conform to external legitimacy pressures
- Service delivery models: Apply operations principles to the service organization
Mission-to-Structure Translation Framework
Develop a systematic translation process from institutional missions to organizational structures:
- Stage 1 - Mission Analysis: Detailed decomposition of what the institution actually does across all mission domains
- Stage 2 - Service Requirements Mapping: Systematic identification of services essential for each mission component
- Stage 3 - Service Characteristics Analysis: Examination of specialization level, geographic dependence, time sensitivity, and volume for each service
- Stage 4 - Structure Evaluation: Matching service requirements to the organizational capabilities of different models
Iterative Refinement
- Apply the preliminary framework to published institutional examples
- Identify gaps, inconsistencies, and areas requiring clarification
- Refine framework categories and relationships
- Seek expert review and incorporate feedback
- Continue refinement until the framework meets the quality criteria
Economic Analysis
20h
Cost Model Development
Develop cost models for each organizational model identified:
- Personnel costs: staffing levels by position type, salary benchmarks (use published surveys), loaded costs including benefits
- Non-personnel costs: collections/resources, technology infrastructure, space and operations, professional development
- Implementation costs: infrastructure setup, training, consulting, contingency
- Present cost ranges acknowledging variation across contexts
Value and Return on Investment Estimation
Estimate value generation for each model through:
- Avoided costs (eliminated duplication, efficiency gains)
- Productivity gains (time savings, enhanced efficiency)
- Quality improvements affecting institutional outcomes
- Strategic value (competitive positioning, mission achievement)
Critical note: Acknowledge uncertainty in value estimation. Present as reasoned estimates requiring
empirical validation, not precise calculations.
Comparative Analysis
- Compare absolute costs across organizational models
- Calculate per-capita costs based on user populations served
- Estimate ROI ratios for each model
- Develop scenario analyses for different institutional contexts
Quality Assurance and Validation
16h
Framework Quality Criteria
Evaluate framework against quality criteria:
- Comprehensiveness: Captures all major organizational model variations found in the literature
- Coherence: Logical relationships between framework components
- Utility: Practical for institutional decision-making
- Transferability: Applicable across different institutional contexts
- Clarity: Accessible to non-expert audiences
Expert Review Process
- Identify experts with diverse perspectives (practitioners, administrators, researchers)
- Provide structured review questions focusing on completeness, accuracy, and utility
- Synthesize feedback systematically
- Incorporate revisions based on expert input
Documentation of Analytical Rigor
- Credibility: Prolonged engagement, triangulation across sources, peer debriefing
- Dependability: Audit trail of decisions, codebook documentation, consistency checks
- Transferability: Thick description of contexts, explicit criteria, clear sampling approach
- Confirmability: Reflexivity statement, data-grounded analysis, negative case analysis
Decision Tools and Implementation Guidance
20h
Decision Matrix Development
Translate framework into operational decision tools:
- Create comparison tables summarizing model characteristics across key dimensions
- Develop institutional context assessment worksheets
- Design decision trees guiding model selection based on context factors
- Create stakeholder priority matrices for weighing competing interests
Implementation Guidance Development
Develop practical implementation guidance, including:
- Pre-implementation assessment protocols
- Phased implementation timelines
- Stakeholder engagement strategies
- Change management approaches
- Risk identification and mitigation strategies
- Monitoring and adaptation protocols
Outcome Metrics
Define outcome-based metrics that enable the assessment of organizational effectiveness tied to mission achievement. Metrics should be practical to collect while providing meaningful evidence of impact.
Protocol references
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77-101.
Jabareen Y. Building a conceptual framework: philosophy, definitions, and procedure. Int J Qual Methods. 2009;8(4):49-62.
Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10:53.
Moher D, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.
Elrod JK, Fortenberry JL Jr. The hub-and-spoke organization design: an avenue for serving patients well. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(Suppl 1):457.
Acknowledgements
This protocol was developed through application to library organizational analysis in academic health systems. The methodology draws on established approaches in systematic review, thematic analysis, and framework development while emphasizing mission-driven organizational design as the foundational analytical principle.