11
Despite the organizational leadership strongly express-
ing support for the adoption and implementation of
VR-MRT, there was some concern about what could be
described as Lack of Action. In addition to organizational
inertia, many of these concerns were attributed to compet-
ing priorities, long-term commitment, high expectations,
and a lack of understanding of what it would take for suc-
cessful adoption and implementation of VR-MRT (i.e.,
leadership was “out of touch with reality”).
Considering this organizational inertia and lack of a
common vision and shared expectations, many interview-
ees expressed the need for a champion(s) of the effort.
However, none of the organizational interviewees felt they
could fill this role. They all suggested other individuals. As
discussed by Warrick [56], a change champion needs to
have specific skills to be successful. When looking to imple-
ment VR-MRT in the future, organizations may consider
identifying and training individual(s) to fill this role. It may
also be possible for NIOSH to include some of this training
in their future implementation research.
Related to Individual Buy-In, many participants also
talked about Technology Aversion with both the Deliverers
and Recipients. As discussed with respect to the Complexity
of the Innovation, resistance to technology and change in
general is a common issue. In this case, participants felt that
the Deliverers and Recipients could be swayed with time
and exposure, like how they eventually accepted other IT
innovations (e.g., computer-based tools for mapping).
Lastly, the organizational participants discussed the
need to Build the Implementation Team. They under-
scored the need to find the right people, align their roles,
and give them time to develop working relationships to be
successful.
Implementation Process: What is needed to implement?
Although the Implementation Process domain is more
applicable to site-specific implementation efforts, it con-
tains many of the same strategies required for the appropri-
ate design, development, and evaluation of the innovation.
Constructs such as Teaming, Planning, Tailoring, Engaging,
Reflecting and Evaluating, and Adapting all strongly align
with strategies that have been employed by NIOSH during
the conceptualization and development of VR-MRT. These
same strategies will also be applied throughout the future
evaluation research to not only enhance the chances of suc-
cess, but to define and measure implementation progress.
One general suggestion that emerged from the responses
of several interviewees across roles was the belief that for
something like VR-MRT to be widely adopted and imple-
mented, its deployment should be gradual and incremental.
It was suggested that this approach could help to alleviate
several of the barriers that were identified across interview-
ees, including Technology Aversion and Individual Buy-In
as well as concerns around Resources and Personnel. This
concept is captured under the Doing construct.
LIMITATIONS
While this research provides an important step in the
implementation evaluation of the VR-MRT platform, the
results should be considered along with the limitations of
the study. First, the surveys and interviews were conducted
with a relatively small sample size and may not reflect the
opinions of the entire mining industry. Similarly, the sam-
ple was one of convenience and self-selected which might
have caused the perceived barriers of a less motivated group
to go undetected. Furthermore, this analysis was conceptu-
alized exclusively across the CFIR 2.0 domains, which may
have precluded the emergence of themes that exist outside
the framework. However, the goal of this pre-implementa-
tion study was to identify potential facilitators and barriers
early in the process to better prepare researchers and stake-
holders for future widespread implementation efforts where
these limitations will be addressed. Lastly, though the bar-
riers and facilitators are intended to be general to VR mine
safety training, the lack of exposure to other VR applica-
tions may bias the results towards VR-MRT specifically.
Further study may be needed to support the generalization.
CONCLUSION
As the mining industry continues to evolve, it is critical
to maintain and enhance emergency preparedness efforts,
particularly in the realm of mine rescue training. VR train-
ing offers a promising avenue to supplement traditional
training, making it more realistic, accessible, and effective.
To better understand the challenges and barriers to imple-
menting VR training, NIOSH researchers developed the
VR Mine Rescue Training platform (VR-MRT). As a part
of the pre-implementation phase of the innovation’s evalua-
tion, researchers talked to individuals at various implemen-
tation levels to assess the acceptability and appropriateness
of VR-MRT and to identify actionable barriers and facilita-
tors to the implementation of VR mine safety training in
general. Researchers employed an inductive and deductive
strategy based on the IS framework, CFIR 2.0. This frame-
work helped to make potential solutions more obvious by
grouping the concerns in the domain where they were most
applicable.
Overall, the results suggest that VR-MRT is acceptable
and appropriate for use in mine rescue training. Mine res-
cue team members expressed a strong interest in using the
Despite the organizational leadership strongly express-
ing support for the adoption and implementation of
VR-MRT, there was some concern about what could be
described as Lack of Action. In addition to organizational
inertia, many of these concerns were attributed to compet-
ing priorities, long-term commitment, high expectations,
and a lack of understanding of what it would take for suc-
cessful adoption and implementation of VR-MRT (i.e.,
leadership was “out of touch with reality”).
Considering this organizational inertia and lack of a
common vision and shared expectations, many interview-
ees expressed the need for a champion(s) of the effort.
However, none of the organizational interviewees felt they
could fill this role. They all suggested other individuals. As
discussed by Warrick [56], a change champion needs to
have specific skills to be successful. When looking to imple-
ment VR-MRT in the future, organizations may consider
identifying and training individual(s) to fill this role. It may
also be possible for NIOSH to include some of this training
in their future implementation research.
Related to Individual Buy-In, many participants also
talked about Technology Aversion with both the Deliverers
and Recipients. As discussed with respect to the Complexity
of the Innovation, resistance to technology and change in
general is a common issue. In this case, participants felt that
the Deliverers and Recipients could be swayed with time
and exposure, like how they eventually accepted other IT
innovations (e.g., computer-based tools for mapping).
Lastly, the organizational participants discussed the
need to Build the Implementation Team. They under-
scored the need to find the right people, align their roles,
and give them time to develop working relationships to be
successful.
Implementation Process: What is needed to implement?
Although the Implementation Process domain is more
applicable to site-specific implementation efforts, it con-
tains many of the same strategies required for the appropri-
ate design, development, and evaluation of the innovation.
Constructs such as Teaming, Planning, Tailoring, Engaging,
Reflecting and Evaluating, and Adapting all strongly align
with strategies that have been employed by NIOSH during
the conceptualization and development of VR-MRT. These
same strategies will also be applied throughout the future
evaluation research to not only enhance the chances of suc-
cess, but to define and measure implementation progress.
One general suggestion that emerged from the responses
of several interviewees across roles was the belief that for
something like VR-MRT to be widely adopted and imple-
mented, its deployment should be gradual and incremental.
It was suggested that this approach could help to alleviate
several of the barriers that were identified across interview-
ees, including Technology Aversion and Individual Buy-In
as well as concerns around Resources and Personnel. This
concept is captured under the Doing construct.
LIMITATIONS
While this research provides an important step in the
implementation evaluation of the VR-MRT platform, the
results should be considered along with the limitations of
the study. First, the surveys and interviews were conducted
with a relatively small sample size and may not reflect the
opinions of the entire mining industry. Similarly, the sam-
ple was one of convenience and self-selected which might
have caused the perceived barriers of a less motivated group
to go undetected. Furthermore, this analysis was conceptu-
alized exclusively across the CFIR 2.0 domains, which may
have precluded the emergence of themes that exist outside
the framework. However, the goal of this pre-implementa-
tion study was to identify potential facilitators and barriers
early in the process to better prepare researchers and stake-
holders for future widespread implementation efforts where
these limitations will be addressed. Lastly, though the bar-
riers and facilitators are intended to be general to VR mine
safety training, the lack of exposure to other VR applica-
tions may bias the results towards VR-MRT specifically.
Further study may be needed to support the generalization.
CONCLUSION
As the mining industry continues to evolve, it is critical
to maintain and enhance emergency preparedness efforts,
particularly in the realm of mine rescue training. VR train-
ing offers a promising avenue to supplement traditional
training, making it more realistic, accessible, and effective.
To better understand the challenges and barriers to imple-
menting VR training, NIOSH researchers developed the
VR Mine Rescue Training platform (VR-MRT). As a part
of the pre-implementation phase of the innovation’s evalua-
tion, researchers talked to individuals at various implemen-
tation levels to assess the acceptability and appropriateness
of VR-MRT and to identify actionable barriers and facilita-
tors to the implementation of VR mine safety training in
general. Researchers employed an inductive and deductive
strategy based on the IS framework, CFIR 2.0. This frame-
work helped to make potential solutions more obvious by
grouping the concerns in the domain where they were most
applicable.
Overall, the results suggest that VR-MRT is acceptable
and appropriate for use in mine rescue training. Mine res-
cue team members expressed a strong interest in using the