the deliberation and the survey itself. (For more details on the use of this method,
including the full deliberative poll that was utilized, see Decker and Durand, 2011.)
Before concluding this discussion of the Wisdom of Crowds methodology and its uses to evaluation,
we show for illustrative purposes what was learned from the deliberative poll of hospital managers
and nurses. Table 1 displays the responses of managers and nurses to a series of survey
questions about implementation risk factors. (The entries show in percentages the beliefs that a particular
risk factor was present and would adversely affect the innovation.)
As is evident in Table 1, several risk factors as well as differences between managers and nurses in
perceived, likely risk factors were identified. Once identified, discussions followed among managers
and nurses, discussions which one of the authors observed directly, and which eventually led in a number
of cases to corrective action or to some risk factor amelioration on the part of hospital administrators.
Although we have no hard evidence on the point, subsequent informal conversations with top
executives of the hospital led us to believe that such corrective action or risk amelioration resulted
in some time and monetary savings to the facility. Impressionistically, we also came to believe that
this Wisdom of Crowds approach reduced stress levels among those at the frontlines of implementing
the ‘‘children’s hospital within a hospital’’ innovation. Whether or this predictive approach helped to
produce any of this, however, the hospital subsequently implemented the innovation and the ‘‘children’s
hospital within a hospital’’ is now open, operating, and financially successful.