202 Summary with attention to moral actions and intentions. Second, team elements included the need for dialogue and openness, constructive evaluation, and team learning. And third, for superiors we added some leadership elements: moral leadership, systematic and efficient morality, an open, supportive, and stimulating attitude toward staff, and being a role model in the organization. To a greater or lesser extent, all elements play a role in exhibiting and strengthening moral craftsmanship. Based on our explorative search on the meaning of MCS, we developed a questionnaire to operationalize MCS and facilitate its measurement. The MCS-Questionnaire (MCSQ) contains 70 items in 8 domains: the general presence of reflexivity, awareness, judging and reasoning, consulting others, taking action, looking back, interaction, leadership. Our testing – via think-aloud interviews – of users’ experiences with the questionnaire improved its usability and content validity. To make the MCSQ applicable for future studies, the current version needs to be validated, shortened, and possibly made context-independent. In the future, a validated version of the MCSQ can help measure the MCS of professionals in organizations, and possibly for measuring the impact of interventions on MCS. Impact of MCD on moral craftsmanship Chapter 5 describes how the developed MCSQ was used to measure the impact of a series of MCD sessions on the MCS of prison staff. We made use of three intervention locations and three control locations: with staff who did or did not participate in MCD. We compared the results of a total of 915 questionnaires on a) the two measurement moments (before and after a series of MCD) and b) the control- and intervention locations. A positive development occurred in some elements of the MCS – 7 of the 70 items – when comparing MCSQ-items in the intervention groups before and after a series of MCD. For example, prison staff in the intervention groups scored higher after the MCD series on items about asking questions about the ‘why’ of actions of colleagues or supervisors. MCD participants stated – after the series, and significantly more than in the controlgroup – that they received tools to deal with morally challenging situations and found it easier to deal with such situations. Additionally, as we see in the increased item score in the pre- and post-measurement comparison, MCD participants speak to their supervisor more often when he or she does something they feel is not right. However, for many items we saw little or no statistically significant differences between pre- and post-measurements within intervention locations, or between control and intervention locations.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw