ABSTRACT
This chapter examines some key sociocultural features of the contests ongoing in the specific arena of implementation-related health services research (HSR). Although scholars in the disciplines of public and community health have for many years studied the implementation of evidence-based behavioral change, the science of doing so in real-world clinical health service settings is so young that agreement on what to call it has not yet coalesced. The implementation science (IS)-HSR research showed overall that institutional factors particularly funding mechanisms and their entailments structure and ensure high workloads. Attentions are divided and morale and functionality compromised not only by the high number of disparate projects undertaken but also by other affiliations and duties that membership in the IS-HS researcher's career world demands. Each IS-HSR unit is charged with developing and maintaining a program of research relating to a particular set of diseases or conditions. Each strives to create a well-stocked portfolio of projects, quality improvement processes or products, and publications.
