On this page we list some of our favourite writing about knowledge mobilization in all its forms. This is not meant to be a comprehensive reference list. Rather we have chosen work that is interesting to us in some specific way – usually because it provides either an interesting conceptual approach or some important empirical evidence.
We welcome comments or suggestions on the list as a whole or the individual items listed. Please e-mail to rspe@oise.utoronto.ca
Also see our links pages for links to some of the organizations producing this work.
Bates, Richard. (2002) The impact of educational research: alternative methodologies and conclusions. Research Papers in Education, 17, 4, 403-408.
Key words: Educational research, Australia research, research policy, research impact, research practice
Bates summarizes the results of a recent Australian report comprised of four commissioned studies by the DETYA (Department of Education, Training, and Youth Affairs) to investigate the impact of educational research on both policy and practice. Overall, the author concluded that these methodologically diverse studies found the impact of research to be complex and often indirect. The theory to application paradigm did not figure predominantly in the accounts of educational practice
Craik, J. & Rappolt, S. (2008). Enhancing research utilization capacity through multifaceted professional development. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60,155-164.
Key words: Research utilization, grounded theory, professional development
Using grounded theory, the authors analyze the interviews of 11 practicing occupational therapists to examine how they develop skills for applying research evidence to their clinical practice. To eliminate the potential for known barriers to research use the authors interviewed “elite” occupational therapists. For the purposes of this study, they were defined as elite by being recognized by their peers as an educationally influential practitioner and having practiced in a well-resourced research –oriented environment affiliated with a university in a large urban facility. Knott and Wildavsky’s (1980) Stages of Research Utilization were used as criteria for evaluating participant’s research utilization activity. Results revealed that skills for retrieval, critical analysis and integration of research evidence could be developed through the therapists’ engagement in mentoring, learning, and research activities as well as providing client services. Based on the findings, the authors developed a model of research utilization capacity suggesting that organizations can promote research utilization by providing clinician-researcher and clinical leaders as mentors for practitioners and resources to undertake research utilization capacity building activities.
Davies, P. (2000). The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice. Oxford Review of Education, 26, 3&4, 356-378.
The author summarizes the different types of systematic reviews and discusses their relevance to educational policy and practice. He refers to the criticism that education researchers appear to serve the interests of researchers rather than those of policy makers, practitioners and those who use the education system. There is a discussion of the problems with the utilization of systematic reviews. These include the assertion that the quality of these reviews is dependent on the quality of the studies reviewed and on the rigour, transparency and reporting criteria used by the reviewers. He discusses the need to bridge the gap between the knowledge and research needs of education practitioners and researcher considering education and the difficulties associated with relating research terms and practices in a relevant way to educational policy and practice. Davies, coordinator of the Campbell Collaboration, refers to this organization as a provider of “an international mechanism for preparing, maintaining and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of educational interventions, policy and practice.”
Dobbins et al. (2007). Information transfer: What do decision makers want and need from researchers? Implementation Science, 2 (10). 1-12.
Key words: Knowledge transfer, community-based organizations, health care, decision makers, information transfer
The authors begin with a discussion about the background of knowledge transfer and how effective transfer of research evidence could be used to inform policy and practice to improve health outcomes. They suggest that researchers need to become more effective communicators of research finders while practitioners need to become receptive to including evidence into their practice. The way forward in this process is through collaborative efforts and restructuring work environments to support knowledge transfer and use. The purpose of the study was to do a systematic assessment of the need for research-based information by decision-makers who work in community-based organizations. The method used in the study was a cross-sectional telephone interview consisting of 65 questions. The results suggest that health professionals working in community-based organizations want access to high quality evidence that provides explicit implications for policy and practice. In addition, the authors report that collaboration between research-based and community-based organizations would likely provide familiarity with research and therefore improve the knowledge transfer activities between the organizations. Collaboration could also ease the knowledge transfer process by allowing the researchers to identify their audience, understand where research findings and evidence are most needed, and provide engagement between researchers and users to work together to design, carry-out and interpret studies. The authors conclude with the hope that building more collaborative processes could create more inclusive relationships between researchers, decision-makers and practitioners.
Estabrooks, C. (1999). The conceptual structure of research utilization. Research in Nursing & Health, 22, 203-216.
Key words: Research utilization, structural equation modeling
Estabrooks defines research utilization as a complex process in which knowledge, in the form of research, is transformed from the results of one or more studies into possible interventions and use in practice which may or may not take the form of a product. The purpose of this study was to explore the conceptual structure of research utilization. A survey was administered to a random selection of 1500 registered nurses from Western Canada and representative of several clinical areas (general hospital, critical care, geriatric/long term care, public health and home care). Results of the study support the existence of three underlying concepts of research utilization: instrumental (direct), conceptual (indirect), and symbolic (persuasive). As well, the study results suggest that although research utilization is complex it can be measured with relatively simple questions.
Gough, D. & Elbourne, D. (2002). Systematic research synthesis to inform policy, practice and democratic debate. Social Policy & Society, 1, 3, 225-236.
Key words: Quantitative data, qualitative data, research synthesis, systematic review
The authors present the issues contextualizing the debate surrounding the role and utility the various systematic approaches used to synthesize research evidence. Their review considers the ideological, methodological and political differences of qualitative and quantitative research and point out that although most systematic reviews have been concerned with the synthesis of quantitative data there is a need for synthesis of interpretative qualitative studies. They discuss the work involving systematic reviews done by of the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating (EPPI) Centre focus on health promotion and education and the Cochrane Collaboration concerned primarily with the field of medicine and the Campbell Collaboration in which the focus is on crime and justice, social welfare and education. Their discussion of the research emphasizes a transparent process of the issues recognized in the literature and the debate surrounding the role and provision of evidence to inform policy, practice and the democratic use of research knowledge.
Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., et al. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map? The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26, 13–24.
Key words: terminology, knowledge-to-action process, conceptual paper
In this paper Graham et al. examine the similarities and differences among multiple terms used to describe what they refer to as knowledge-to-action (KTA) process. A comprehensive table summarizes terms, definitions and sources for the following concepts: knowledge translation, knowledge transfer, knowledge exchange, research utilization, implementation, dissemination, diffusion, continuing education and continuing professional development. Graham et al. propose a conceptual framework that divides the KTA process into two areas: knowledge creation and action. The knowledge creation phase includes 4 stages- knowledge inquiry, knowledge synthesis and knowledge tools/products. The second phase (Action cycle) follows these steps: Identification of problem; adapt knowledge to local context; assess barriers to knowledge use; select, tailor, implement interventions; monitor knowledge use; evaluate outcomes; sustain knowledge use. Graham et al. conclude that consensus on terms and definitions are essential if knowledge producers, implementers and users are to effectively and meaningfully communicate with each other.
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, T., MacFarlane, F., Bate, P. & Kyriakidow, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82 (4), 581-629.
Key words: systematic review, evidence-based model
Greenhalgh et al. address the question: How can we spread and sustain innovations in health service delivery and organization? The analysis includes content (defining and measuring the diffusion of innovation in organizations) and process. The discussion is based around 1) an evidence-based model for considering the diffusion of innovations 2) clear knowledge gaps where further research should be focused, and 3) a methodology for systematically reviewing policy and management.
Hargreaves, D. (1999). The knowledge-creating school. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47, 2, 122-144.
Key words: knowledge, dissemination, profession, educational research
Hargreaves calls for a reconceptualization of knowledge creation and its dissemination in education research. He proposes that schools should learn from the example of high technology firms where the importance of knowledge creation and dissemination is acknowledged stating that “to be content with current knowledge and practice is to be left behind”. In this paper, Hargreaves outlines the features of an ideal knowledge creating school as one that:
Audits its professional working knowledge
Manages the process of creating new professional knowledge
Validates the professional knowledge created
Disseminates the created professional knowledge
Hargreaves contends that networks are key to offering a more effective model of dissemination in which all school can participate in professional knowledge creation, application and dissemination. He sees the role of universities as initiating, supporting and co-ordinating networks and webs for educational research and professional knowledge creation.
Jacobson, N. (2007). Social Epistemology: Theory for the”Fourth Wave” Of Knowledge Transfer and Exchange Research. Science Communication, 29, 116-127.
Key words: Knowledge transfer and exchange, knowledge utilization, knowledge translation, research utilization
In this paper, Jacobson reviews the role of models and theory in knowledge transfer and exchange. She asserts that an approach guided by social epistemology would focus the change from understanding the process of knowledge transfer strategies to one of understanding the impact of different settings or transfer strategies on the knowledge that is being transferred. Jacobson proposes that adoption of concepts from social epistemology would encourage researchers to focus on the substance of the knowledge they are transferring. Furthermore, it would provide frameworks for critical examination of current knowledge transfer practices and research and open the discussion to one of effectiveness and attention to issues of power and equity.
Jacobson, N., Butterill, D., & Goering, P. (2003). Development of a framework for knowledge translation: Understanding user context. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 8, 94–99.
Jacobson et al. produce a framework for knowledge translation that synthesizes theoretical and empirical literature in the field on what is known about user groups. The framework contains five domains (the user group, the issue, the research, the researcher-user relationship and dissemination strategies) including questions that act as a practical organizational tool for researchers to increase their familiarity with a user group during knowledge translation projects.
Kerner, J. F. (2006). Dullest translation versus knowledge integration: A “funder’s” prospective. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26, 72–80.
Key words: health services, discovery-delivery gap
While this article focuses on Health Service Delivery programs, its review of the background and challenges in closing the discovery-delivery gap, crosses disciplinary boundaries. Exemplar strategies targeting the development-delivery gap are highlighted. Kerner concludes that translating research into practice requires a common language between stakeholders concerning the meaning of knowledge translation, knowledge integration and the nature of evidence. In the end, collaboration and partnerships (researchers to practitioners) are crucial to knowledge integration.
Klein, J., Connell, N., & Meyer, E. (2005). Knowledge characteristics of communities of practice. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 3, 106-114.
Key words: Communities of practice, knowledge sharing, knowledge nurturing
This paper examines the structure and knowledge activity of communities of practice to identify and characterize communities of practice into a four-way typology based on knowledge characteristics: stratified-sharing, egalitarian-sharing, stratified nurturing and egalitarian-nurturing. Klein, et al. suggests that knowledge evolves differently through different classes communities of practice. For instance, knowledge within stratified communities tends to evolve more slowly due to the influence of the different levels of expertise, in a predominantly top down progression, while moving more rapidly in egalitarian communities where they predict knowledge to be shared evenly between different grades. Although the authors have attempted to examine the different ways that knowledge is treated within various communities of practice they acknowledge that although they supported their argument with examples the framework they propose requires validation by empirical investigation.
Kotler, P., & Lee,N. (2005). Best of breed: When it comes to gaining a market edge while supporting a social cause, “Corporate Social Marketing” leads the pack. Social Marketing Quarterly, 3-4, 92-103.
Key words: corporate social marketing (CSM), case studies
The authors define corporate social marketing (CSM) as a “strategy that uses marketing principles and techniques to foster behavior change in a target population, improving society while at the same time building markets for products or services.” (p. 92) They cite several reasons why CSM is exemplary when considering marketing benefits: changes in personal behaviour also can effect change in customer behaviour, it is more likely to be accepted by government and non-profit organizations with making measurable progress when involved with public agencies and nonprofits. The authors describe CSM as one of the surest ways to have a measurable impact on a social issue since it increases the number of people who act in a way that befits society. The use of marketing techniques to change behaviour has been used by government agencies and non-profit groups since the seventies with programs aimed at seat belt use, immunization programs and the but did not become part of corporate agenda until the mid-1990’s. Using case studies of successful corporate social marketing efforts (Crest: Cavity Free Zones for the Poor reducing the disparity in oral health between rich and poor requiring at-risk children to learn and practice good dental care habits) this article describes the conditions required to gain full marketing benefits. They suggest choosing a social problem whose solution at least partly requires people to change their individual behaviour with the target behaviour being directly related to one or more of the company’s products.
Kuruvilla et al. (2006). Describing the impact of health research: A research impact framework. BMC Health Services Research, 6 (134).
The research impact framework provides researchers with a systematic method of thinking through and describing the impact of their work. It was developed as a means to create a standardized framework for describing impacts across topics and methods; to facilitate comparison across time and cases; to guide researchers in planning implementation and evaluation strategies; to facilitate an understanding of the influences of research in society; to promote accountability; and to contribute to the evaluations of research impact. To create the framework the authors used an inductive method of mapping out potential research impact areas in health research and used this initial map to develop survey questions for a semi-structured interview guide with principal investigators at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The framework was developed out of the analysis of the interviews and based within the areas of: research-related impacts, policy impacts, services impacts and societal impacts. Within each broad impact category, sub-categories were identified and expanded on to understand the impact of research on use. The authors conclude that the framework is helpful to guide researchers by providing them with a set of descriptive categories to describe the impact of their work. This will allow researchers to appropriately describe what they do and how they do it to their target audiences.
Landry, R. (2008, April 6-10). Knowledge transfer as a value creation process. Paper presented at the International Conference on Manage of Technology 2008, Dubai, UAE.
Key words: knowledge transfer, value creation, knowledge based opportunities, appropriation, business models, push model, interaction model
Landry explores knowledge transfer as a value creation process that is comprised of four stages – identification of knowledge based opportunities, transformation into economic and social value found in goods, services and practices, communication of developed knowledge and appropriation of the value of communicated knowledge. The aim of this paper is to create business models that will help technology managers identify ways to manage these four stages and improve the creation of value from knowledge. The author concludes that to achieve success in knowledge value creation, the appropriate business model (push or interaction models) specific to either individuals or organizations must be chosen. Technology managers must not only work towards improving strong activities but also the weaker activities in the knowledge value creation process so that it will be more likely that the organization will achieve success in other knowledge transfer projects in the future. Although the author admits to oversimplification of reality when considering the different stages in the value creation process, the paper thoroughly investigates the considerations that need to be taken into account in each stage of the process and potential problems that could arise.
Landry, R., Amara, N. & Lamari, M. (2001).Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada. Research Policy, 30(2), 333-349.
This paper is based on an empirical study investigating research utilization of social science research in Canada with particular attention to the differences between disciplines and determinants of utilization of social science research knowledge. A mail survey was administered to 1229 social science faculty members of 55 Canadian universities. Based on a process design framework the scale used in the study were an adapted version of Knott and Wildawsky’s (1980) scale of the six stages of knowledge utilization (transmission, cognition, reference, effort and influence, application). The authors present a well-developed review of the major theoretical models and factors that were used to explain utilization. Results showed that although 20% of social science research does not get transmitted nearly half of the social science knowledge usually or always gets to practitioners, professionals and decision makers. Professional social sciences (social work, and industrial relations) were found to have higher rates of research utilization than the disciplinary social sciences (economics, political science, sociology, anthropology). The most important determinants were associated with the interaction of researchers and users the mechanisms linking researchers to users, dissemination efforts, adaptation of outputs, users’ context and publication assets of researchers. The authors note the most important finding is that knowledge utilization is more dependent on factors related to the behaviour of the researchers and users’ context than on the attributes of the research products.
Landry, R., Amara, N., Pablos-Mendes, A., Shermani, R., & Gold, I. (2006). The knowledge-value chain: a conceptual framework for knowledge translation in health. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 84, 8, 597-602.
Key words: Public health, knowledge valuation
The authors describe the underutilization of the large body of knowledge generated by health research as the “know-do gap”; that is, the gap between what is known and what gets done as evidenced by the amount of knowledge that is not used and developed quickly enough into health policies, products, services and outcomes. This article puts forward the concept of the knowledge value chain that looks at knowledge as a resource having characteristics that can increase or decrease value to the activities carried out by public health organizations. This non-linear concept consists of five perspectives that the authors suggest should be considered when developing any knowledge-management strategy: mapping and acquisition, creation and destruction, integration and sharing/transfer, replication and protection, and performance and innovation. The authors also identify five problems associated with the transfer of knowledge from one community or organization to another: knowledge access, knowledge incompleteness, knowledge asymmetry, knowledge valuation, and knowledge incompatibility. The authors recognize that although knowledge has characteristics that can increase or decrease the value of the organizational output it is difficult to measure knowledge and assess its value which makes it difficult to collect evidence on its impact on outcomes of public health programs and interventions.
Landry, R., Amara, N. & Rherrad. (2006). Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities. Research Policy, 35, 1599-1615.
This empirical study investigated the transference of university research knowledge in the context of the commercialization of knowledge by looking at spin-off companies as the most visible form of commercialization of university research. In particular, they wanted to know why some university researchers are more likely to create spin-off companies than others. In this paper, the authors define a university spin-off as the creation of a new company established commercially exploiting research knowledge created by university researchers. In their examination of the determinants that may influence the decision of Canadian researchers to create spin-offs the authors considered the influence of the following assets: financial, intellectual property, knowledge, social capital, organizational, and personal. The study was based on a telephone survey of 1554 university researchers funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Results of the logistic regression analysis indicated that research commercialization in more extensive in Canadian universities than generally assumed with 16.8% of the respondents having attempted to create spin-offs and 32% of the respondents having used various means to protect their intellectual property. They also discovered that the likelihood of launching university spin-offs increases as the researchers have access to more resources in the form of grants programs, intellectual property assets, knowledge assets (computer science and engineering) knowledge experience in consulting, social capital assets, access to the resources of large universities and large laboratories and many years of experience in research.
Landry, R., Amara, N., & Ouimet, M. (2007). Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(6), 561-592.
Key words: knowledge transfer, universities, engineering, natural sciences, research, determinants of transfer, survey data
The purpose of this paper is to determine the extent and the differences in the extent of knowledge transfer across different fields, and the determinants of knowledge transfer. It focuses on the activities of individual researchers in the natural sciences and engineering fields at Canadian universities. The paper consists of two parts: a literature review and data analysis of a survey of 1,554 researchers funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), representative of 6 categories of research fields. The results of this study support the hypothesis that the levels of knowledge transfer activities vary across research fields. For example, engineering ranked the highest amongst the six fields in the knowledge transfer index, followed by earth sciences. Also, as this study considers knowledge transfer from a broader perspective than commercialization of knowledge, it contributes statistical evidence that suggest researchers can be active in non-commercial knowledge transfer activities even when they are not active in commercial knowledge transfer activities.
Landry, R., Amara, N., Ouimet, M., & Saïhi, M. (2007-2008). Evidence on How Academics Manage their Portfolio of Activities. Paper presented at the 6th Biennial International Triple Helix Conference on University-Industry Government Links, Singapore.
The authors of this paper aim to explore how the relationships between academic activities within a portfolio affect resource allocation and performance and how categories of determinants impact the likelihood of the academic’s involvement in each activity. Using a multivariate path model, data collected from 1,554 university researchers funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) were analyzed. Results suggest that there are three types of portfolios where academic activities are complementarities, substitutes or independent activities. Publications, spin-off creation, patenting, consulting and production of knowledge spillover were found to complement each other whereas teaching and publication were found to be substitutes, where there is an opportunity cost between the performance of one and the performance of the other. In the third model, the aforementioned activities were grouped into teaching-dependent and teaching-independent activities. Exploiting synergies in complementary relationships and reducing conflicts over resources between substitutes could improve performance in creating, transmitting and transferring knowledge. The determinants investigated by the study include financial resources, knowledge attributes, novelty of research, research fields, networks assets, organizational assets and personal assets, all of which have varying impacts on the involvement in each activity.
Lavis, J., Lomas, J., Hamid, M., & Sewankambo, N. (2006). Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 84, 8, 620-628.
Key words: research evaluation, research synthesis
The authors develop a framework for assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. They describe the proposed framework as having four elements and state that if countries select and implement one or more options from this framework and apply rigorous evaluation there will be a more rigorous research base from which to draw in the future. The four elements of this framework are summarized by the authors as follows: the general climate for research use, the production of research that is relevant and appropriately synthesized for research users, the mix of clusters of activities used to link research to action and the evaluation of efforts to link research to action.
Lavis, J. (2006). Research, public policymaking, and knowledge-translation processes: Canadian efforts to build bridges. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26 (1), 37- 45.
Key words: knowledge-translation, public policy
This article focuses on the relationships between research, knowledge translation processes and public policy makers (including elected officials, political advisors, and civil servants). Examples of Canadian efforts to build bridges (through knowledge translation) between research and public policymaking processes are outlined. Five types of efforts are identified: Production, Push, Facilitating user pull, User pull and Exchange. Lavis suggests that in the future, increased knowledge-translation processes (especially push efforts and efforts to facilitate user pull) should be undertaken on a large scale with rigorous evaluation in order to draw conclusions about their effectiveness.
Lavis, J. N., Robertson, D., Woodside, J.M., Mcleod, C.B., & Abelson, J. (2003). How Can Research Organizations More Effectively Transfer Research Knowledge to Decision Makers? The Milbank Quarterly, 81 (2), 221–248.
Key words: knowledge-transfer strategy, survey data
This paper provides an organizational framework for a knowledge-transfer strategy based on the following five questions: 1. What should be transferred to decision makers (the message)? 2. To whom should research knowledge be transferred (the target audience)? 3. By whom should research knowledge be transferred (the messenger)? 4. How should research knowledge be transferred (the knowledge-transfer processes and supporting communications infrastructure)? 5. With what effect should research knowledge be transferred (evaluation)? Lavis et al. surveyed the directors of applied health and economic/social research organizations in Canada regarding how their organizations transfer research knowledge to decision makes. Implications for further action and future research are outlined.
Lavis, J., et al. (2003). Measuring the impact of health research. Journal of Health Service Research & Policy, 8 (3). 165-170.
Key words: Impact, health, research
The purpose of the paper is to describe an assessment tool for measuring the impact of health research. The authors begin by uncovering five assumptions that affected the development of the assessment tool: (1) Impact measure should be based on an evolving understanding of how to best transfer and facilitate research knowledge including the cultural shifts that are needed for the uptake of research knowledge. (2) A one-size approach is not a feasible approach because it does not encourage learning from the evidence or peers. (3) The most appropriate measure of impact of research is the use of research knowledge in decision making. (4) Understanding the cultural shifts in the use of research knowledge is the most appropriate generic measure of the future impact of research. (5) No tool can capture the full range of traditions in which research knowledge is created and used. The authors state that when creating the assessment tool they needed to consider that there are different outcomes for different audiences in health research. The impact measure tool needed to be fine-tuned for each audience according to the decisions they faced and their context. The steps for using the impact tool are as follows: identify the target audience for research knowledge, select the category of measures to be used based on who is promoting the research to the target audience, select the measures given the resources available to measure impact and finally provide feedback about the data for areas of improvement to the research source. The authors’ conclude that measuring the impact of research should be a core function of research organizations and will lead to greater accountability in the health sector.
Levin, B. (2004, October 17). Making research matter more. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(56). Retrieved March 11, 2008 from
Key words: Education, three element model of research impact
Interest in strengthening the impact and value of education research has been growing around the world. Here Levin outlines a view of the nature of “impact” and point to instances where research has had a positive impact in education, but always within a larger social and political framework. A three element “model” of research impact is developed and used as the basis to assess current situations and to suggest steps that could be taken to support a fuller contribution to education and learning from research.
Luckenbill Brett, J. (1987). Use of nursing practice research findings. Nursing Research, 36, 6, 344-349.
Key words: Research to practice, innovations, dissemination
This paper presents a study that explores the extent to which nurses use selected research findings. Using Roger’s (1983) model of five time-ordered stages of diffusion of innovations (knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation and confirmation) a questionnaire was developed by the author to measure research dissemination and utilization. The survey was administered to 216 practicing nurses in small, medium and large hospitals to determine the level of innovativeness of nurses. The findings suggest that research dissemination and use is occurring with decision making about the nursing practice innovation appearing to follow a time-ordered sequence. The majority of the nurses, from 34% to 95%, were aware of the nursing practice innovation represented while the percentage of nurses who persuaded about a specific nursing practice ranged from 28% to 92%. Research dissemination was found to be variable for both nurses and innovations with five out of the nursing practice innovations used by 70% or more of the nurses while another innovation was only used by 10% of the nurses sampled.
Maynard, A. (2007). Translating evidence into practice: Why is it so difficult? Public Money and Management, 27 (4). 251-256.
The author explores why in health and social care research that evidence has been slow to move into practice. Maynard begins by explaining that using evidence in medicine “remains the exception rather than the rule” (p.252). The reasons for the slow movement of evidence into practice include: The supply of knowledge and improving the flow of knowledge from academia to practitioners; improving the completeness of the evidence base; improving access and capacity to knowledge and relevant evidence. Maynard states that health care needs to invest in knowledge brokers as to improve efficiency and capacity of accessing knowledge and using evidence in practice. However, the author cautions that there are some problems with knowledge brokers because of their independence from interest groups. Additionally, the author calls for the users of knowledge to become better trained in the critical skills need to appraise academic literature. Maynard concludes by reiterating the need for changing the knowledge transfer landscape from evidence-free to evidence-based.
Mitton et al. (2007). Knowledge transfer and exchange: Review and synthesis of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 85 (4). 729-768.
The authors begin with using Kiefer et al’s (2005) definition of knowledge transfer and exchange (KTE) that KTE is an interactive interchange of knowledge between researcher users and producers and that the purposes of KTE are to increase the use of research evidence in policy and practice decisions (p.729). The authors base their review of the literature on the adaptation of a systematic review method used for clinical research questions using the keywords knowledge generation, knowledge translation, knowledge transfer, knowledge uptake, knowledge exchange, knowledge broker, knowledge mobilization, evidence, information and data as the basis for finding the articles. The authors reviewed eighty-one papers, where sixty-three were considered non-implementation studies (opinion papers, reviews, surveys). This literature fell under four themes: organizing frameworks for KTE, barriers and facilitators to KTE, methods and issues for measuring impact of research studies and perspectives from different groups on what does or does not work regarding KTE. The main message from these studies are that having personal contacts and building trust is important for knowledge transfer and exchange as well as to see change in practice. The second type of sources was ten implementation studies where a specific approach to KTE was used in a study. The authors found from their review that the key message from the implementation studies is the need for generating two-way communication between researchers and practitioners. The authors conclude with a brief discussion about the next steps in understanding KTE. They call for attention to be given to articulating how knowledge is transferred from decision makers to researchers and understanding who is responsible for ensuring that knowledge transfer and exchange takes place.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5, 14-37.
After a useful discussion of basic concepts and models of organizational knowledge creation, the author proposes a model of four interactive modes of knowledge conversion: socialization (tacit-to-tacit knowledge); externalization (tacit to explicit knowledge) combination (explicit to explicit knowledge) and internalization (explicit to tacit knowledge). Nonaka provides a comparison of three management models (top-down, middle-up-down, and bottom-up) and offers a practical perspective on the management of organizational knowledge creation with the discussion of the concept of a “hypertext organization”.
Key words: research methods, evidence-based practice, criminal justice
The authors examine the shifts in criminal justice research and the relationship to using evidence in setting policy and defining practice. They discuss the role of rigorous research methodology, the debate surrounding the practicality and ethical concerns of providing convincing and substantive evaluative research. The authors outline the outstanding issues around the dissemination of research findings and barriers to the implementation of evidence based policy and practice in criminal justice. They identify a number of problems in implementing informed evidence-based practice and address the role of ideology, politics and the presence of a research culture in criminal justice agencies. A discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the current use of evidence based criminal justice services provide a concise assessment of the issues involved in the implementation of the evidence-based criminal justice policy and practice.
Nutley, S., Walter, I & Davies, H. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Bristol: Policy Press.
An excellent overview from a storng research team on what we know about using evidence in the social sciences with strong discussions of empirical and conceptual issues. Focuses primarily on education, health and criminal justice, and with more attention to UK evidence.
Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. (2003). From knowing to doing: A framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda. Evaluation, 9, 2, 125-148.
Key words: Evidence-based policy, evidence-based practice, knowledge utilization, research utilization
This article organizes the debate in the literature surrounding research utilization and evidence-based practice around a framework of six main interrelated concerns: types of knowledge, the ways in which research knowledge is utilized, models of the process of utilization; the conceptual frameworks that enable us to understand the process; implementation interventions and different ways of conceptualizing research utilization and evidence-based practice. The authors relate this debate across different parts of the public sector, especially healthcare, education, social care and the criminal justice system. This article discusses the relevance and successful implementation of evidence–based practice the need to develop dissemination strategies to bridge the gap between the two communities of researchers and practitioners.
Primary Health Care and Research & Information Service. (2006). Focus on…knowledge brokering. Flinders University, 4. 1-16.
This paper is a review of knowledge brokering: its definitions, models, evidence of why knowledge brokering is an effective practice in research use, the issues of knowledge brokering, the role of knowledge brokers, and what the future holds for knowledge brokers. Although the authors provide definitions to different terms used for the process of knowledge brokering, they define knowledge brokering as “a role played by a person engaged in linking researchers and policy makers or it can be an activity or process by which knowledge transfer, knowledge exchange, linkage and exchange or knowledge translation takes place” (p.2). To get to the clarification that the role of a knowledge broker is to function as a connector between people as a means of sharing and exchanging knowledge, the authors go through existing models of knowledge brokering and examples of organizations that have successfully used knowledge brokering in information exchange. The authors base their support for the effectiveness of knowledge brokering on previous studies that have found that knowledge brokering facilitates research use and contact between researchers, policy-makers, and practitioners.Therefore, the authors recommend that support systems to build the skills of individuals and creating infrastructure within organizations to support a linking function be developed to enhance the place of knowledge brokering in the cycle of research and practice. The authors conclude that although knowledge brokering is important, we should not lose sight of the important work that individuals do in knowledge transfer.
Rowley, J. (2001). Knowledge management in pursuit of learning: the Learning with Knowledge Cycle. Journal of Information Science, 27, 4, 227-237.
This paper contends that learning and knowledge are linked and suggests effective knowledge management needs to implement aspects of the successful learning organization that facilitates individual and organizational learning in response to continuing change. Rowley proposes a model for the implementation of knowledge (explicit and tacit) management, the Learning with Knowledge Cycle which operates at individual, team and organizational levels. The 6 stages of this Cycle are: knowledge creation and construction, knowledge articulation, knowledge repository updating, knowledge access, knowledge use and knowledge revision. Each of these stages applies to the processes of both tacit and explicit knowledge-based activities. This article concludes by suggesting that the Learning with Knowledge Cycle could be used to provide insights into the types of knowledge activities and identify any gaps in an organization’s learning processes.
Rynes, S., Bartunek, J., & Daft, R. (2001). Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 2, 340-355.
The authors present an exploration of the issue of knowledge transfer between academics and practitioners citing the changes in economic and political conditions, the issue of knowledge and the scarcity of empirical work as the reasons for this renewed interest. The authors review the literature on the role of academic-practitioner collaborative relationships in both generating and disseminating knowledge across boundaries. The submission of manuscripts to the Academy of Management Journal research forum is discussed. Of the forty-nine manuscripts submitted it is notable that 24 manuscripts were returned without review with the most common reason being they did not contain any data as required by the contribution guidelines. The authors attribute this omission to the tendency for academics to express opinions about academic-practitioner relations in the absence of data. Of the remaining articles, the most common reasons for rejection were construct validity problems, mismatches between theory and methods and weak or non-existent theory. Fewer than 20% of the studies involved practitioners in their initial design or engaged them as co-authors however, 53% of the authors had direct contact with practitioners during the course of their studies. The five articles selected for publication are summarized within the framework of Nonaka’s (1994) theory of knowledge creation. Suggestions are made by the authors to increase research relevance and utilization and stress the importance of narrowing the research-practice gap.
Sebba, J. (2000). Education: Using research evidence to reshape practice. Public Money & Management, October-December, 8-10.
Key words: Education, teachers as researchers, research impact
In this article, Sebba discusses initiatives that are happening in education to increase the extent to which researchers and practitioners work together. She refers to Hargreaves (1996) who points to the difficulty of a research agenda that is determined by researchers who do not themselves engage in practice and as a result may not be best placed to identify the most relevant and practical priorities. Sebba concludes that cultural changes are at their beginning stages and are needed at every level with a number of key issues still to be addressed:
Developing a shared, commonly accepted set of criteria for judging quality across the range of methodologies in educational research,
Generating more high-quality evidence and providing development opportunities in research methods
Improving access to currently available ”best” evidence
Establishing the support and involvement of the many, if not most educational researchers to contribute to the process
Improving the capacity of policy-makers to access and use research
Developing greater demand for, and understanding of research among practitioners
Improving the collaboration between higher education, local education authorities and schools which will contribute towards genuine user engagement
Researching the process of the impact of research to assist us to move beyond dissemination to impact (P.9)
Sebba, J. (2007). Enhancing impact on policy-making through increasing user engagement in research. In L. Saunders (Ed.), Educational research and policy-making. London: Routledge.
Key words: User engagement, research, policy
Dr. Judy Sebba explores the context of Hillage’s 1998 review of educational research that educational policy-makers have a lack of interest in and understanding of educational research. To close this gap between understanding and interest, and to promote user engagement in educational research, a seminar series by the Economic Society Research Council (ESRC) was created to increase collaboration between academics and policy-makers through a shared experience. The chapter reports on the outcomes and issues of this seminar series (TLRP) and specifically covers the themes that came out of the seminars: the purposes of user engagement; how users understand knowledge; the expectations of policy-makers to relate to research findings/results; how to involve practitioners/policy-makers in research; and how knowledge is used in the policy realm. In addition to describing these themes, a description of how to involve users in the research process is included. In the conclusion Dr. Sebba provides some proposals for the future development of understanding user engagement with research such as drawing on case studies and using schools as sites of research related activity, improving the mediation (or brokering) process, provide career or professional development opportunities for researchers/policy-makers, and to maintain a network of collaboration between researchers and policy-makers to plan for user engagement.
Sudsawas, P. (2007). Knowledge translation: Introduction to models, strategies, and measures. The National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research.
Key words: models, strategies, measures of knowledge translation
This article is a comprehensive overview of the field of knowledge translation. It included definitions of knowledge translation, characteristics, an analysis of knowledge translation models, effectiveness of knowledge translation strategies, and measures of knowledge use.
Syed-Ikhsan, S. O. S. & Rowland, F. (2004). Knowledge management in a public organization: A study on the relationship between organizational elements and the performance of knowledge transfer. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8 (2), 95-111.
Keywords: empirical study, organizational elements, knowledge transfer performance
This empirical study examines the relationship between five organizational elements (organizational culture, organizational structure, technology, people/human resources, and political directives) in relation to knowledge transfer performance (speed, reliability, accuracy) and knowledge assets (tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge). Empirical data was obtained from a case study of the Ministry of Entrepreneur Development (MED) of Malaysia. The researchers conclude that all transitional elements must be considered as a whole and that public organizations should never neglect issues on political directives when implementing knowledge management.
Tierney,W., Oppenheimer, C., Hudson, B., Benz, J., Finn, A., Hickner,J., Lanier, D., & Gaylin, D. (2007). A national survey of primary care practice-based research networks. Annals of Family Medicine, 5, 3, 242-250. Available at www.medscape.com. Accessed: 18 July 2007.
Keywords: Web-based survey, research to practice, research dissemination
Primary care practice based research networks (PBRN’s) were created in response to two major disconnects between research and practice, namely that research may not translate well to everyday practice and clinical problems encountered in everyday practice are often under investigated. The authors of this study conducted a systematic survey to identify and describe primary care PBRN’s in the U.S. The objective of the survey of PBRN’s was to identify and assess their history, size, location, organization resources operations and productivity (based on funding obtained, studies performed and articles published) as well as the PBRN’s potential for translating research into practice and providing information to primary care practitioners and their patients. A web-based questionnaire was completed by 89 PBRN’s that provided the following information: descriptions of PBRN, member practices and clinicians, patient information, research funding, productivity, and research focus. PBRN administrators were also asked about their strengths and weaknesses, whether member practices had incorporated research results onto their practice and barriers to translating research into practice. Results showed that the average PBRN had been established for an average of approximately 5 years, with one half having conducted 3 or fewer studies. Three quarters of the PBRN’s were affiliated with universities. Higher federal funding was associated with the study of questions posed by outside e researchers (87% v.s. 27%). Active research projects at the time of the survey were focused on a variety of research areas such as addressing clinical questions, health services research, and prevention research.
Waddell, C., Lavis, J., Abelson, J., Lomas, J., Shepherd, C., Bird-Grayson, T., Giacomini, M., & Offord, D. (2005). Research use in children’s mental health policy in Canada: Maintaining vigilance amid ambiguity. Social Science & Medicine, 61, 1649-1657.
The authors investigated why policy-making does not necessarily reflect research evidence. With good research evidence on prevention and treatment programs, they questioned why children with conduct disorders are more likely to be incarcerated than receive effective prevention or treatment programs. This seems to be the case even though research evidence supports that incarceration is ineffective and potentially harmful. They used qualitative methods to analyze data from interviews with 32 politicians and senior civil servants directly involved in policy-making regarding children’s mental health or child antisocial behaviour in Canada. With conduct disorder as the content focus, they explored the overall policy process. Results revealed an “environment of ambiguity” where research evidence was valued and used but was treated as just one source of ideas and information with policy-makers receiving most of their information internally and informally. Accordingly, three major themes were found to have overarching influence on the policy process: inherent ambiguity; instructional constraints; and competing interests.
Walter, I., Nutley, S., Davies, H. Developing a taxonomy of interventions used to increase the impact of research. ESRC Network for Evidence Based Policy Practice, February 2003.
Keywords: empirical evidence, education, UK, health and criminal justice, taxonomy, register of studies, research impact, interventions, cross-sectoral
This paper presents a taxonomy of interventions to increase the impact of research on public sector policy and practice which has been developed by the Research Unit for Research Utilization (RURU) at the University of St. Andrews. This register of research impact studies consists of empirical, conceptual and descriptive papers from within the criminal justice, health, education, and social care sectors. They are categorized according to intervention types, underlying mechanisms and theoretical frameworks.
The RURU database is now a fully searchable library of references holding references to a wide range of materials including journal articles, books, reports, conference proceedings and seminar papers. It is available online at: Research Unit for Research Utilization Database http://arts.st-andrews.as.uk/ruru/
Ward, V., House, A., and Hamer, S. (2009). Knowledge brokering: The missing link in the evidence to action chain? Evidence & Policy, 5 (3). 267-279.
The authors explore the theory behind knowledge brokering using a definition that knowledge brokers are those who are between researchers and decision makers making “research and practice more accessible to each other” (p.268). The authors provide three framework for thinking about knowledge brokering: the knowledge system framework as it relates to knowledge management; the transactional framework focusing on linking processes; and the social change framework examining capacity building. This framework leads the authors into a discussion of the challenges of knowledge brokering which they state are: time and resources; the lack of distinction between brokering roles; the skills required to be a knowledge broker; and the lack of a clear framework for how brokering works. The authors conclude by proposing a broad conceptual framework that focuses on identifying, communicating and refining problems; considers the types of attributes of knowledge that might be used in practice; analyzing the context where knowledge would be use; planning and implementing knowledge transfer activities and considers how knowledge will be used in practice. This type of framework, argue the authors, would create a step towards creating more evidence for evaluating the effectiveness of knowledge brokering.
Holzner, B, Dunn, W.N. & Shahidullah, M. (1987). An accounting scheme for designing science impact indicators: the knowledge system perspective. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 9(2).173-204.
In this article, the social system of knowledge is defined as an accounting scheme that promote the exploration of social impact of socience indictors. The author lists six related knowledge functions (production, structuring, storage, districtuion, utilization,& amandating) which are peformed in diverse domains(industry, agricultural, eduction,etc) by various institutions and organization that diverse in size, autonomy, specialization, and complexity. The author also concludes that institution and organization can enable or delay the impact of science on society in broader way by acting as the mediator between science and society. Further, the author states that the accounting scheme can be beneficial for discovering the influence of science on different aspects of society, aspects of society on which science impacts, and structure by which social impacts of science are mediated. Finally, future research direction are pointed out.
Milton, G., Carol, Adair., Mckenzie, E., Patten, S.,& Brenda, Parry.(2007). Knowledge Transfer and Exchange: Review and Synthesis of the Literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 85(4).729-768.
In this article, the authors review current literature on Knowledge Transfer and Exchange (KTE), which is an interactive process that includes knowledge interchange between research users and researcher producers The authors identify the facts that only 20 percent of the examined studies reported on the real-life application of KTE strategy, and that only a limited amount of the research has been formally evaluated. As well, the article reports that the evidence base is not sufficient for conducting evidence-based KTE for health policy decision making. The authors finally point out that KTE should be reconceptualized, or evaluating strategies should be more rigorously applied to provide a sufficient evidence base for later activities.
Nutley, S. & Davies, H. (1999). The Fall and Rise of Evidence in Criminal Justice. Public Money & Management, January – March, p 47-54.
In this article, the authors focus on three models of evidence-based practice: the research-based practitioner model, the embedded research model, and the organizational excellence model. They use cross-sector literature review to examine mechanisms for advancing evidence-based practice and to review methods for improving research use in social care. The authors conclude that the ideas originating from these three models can be effective at diverse times and in diverse service settings, and point out that it is necessary to formulate a consistent strategic framework to encourage research use.
Nutly,S.,Walter, I., Davies, H.(2009). Promoting Evidence-based Practice: Models and Mechanisms From Cross-Sector Review. Research on Social Work Practice, 19(5).552-559.
This research particularly focuses on the management of offenders by the probation service while describing the production and usage of evidence and its effect on efficiency in the criminal justice system. The authors outline the long lasting debates on proper methodology for evaluating effectiveness, and also identifies some problems in the efforts to promote the effectiveness of research evidence about the practice of offender supervision. In the end, this research summarizes the strengths and weaknesses of efforts to build up evidence-based criminal justice services with the aim of providing an example for other public services.
