How Can Research Organizations More Effectively Transfer Research Knowledge to Decision Makers?

McMaster University.
Milbank Quarterly (Impact Factor: 5.06). 02/2003; 81(2):221-48, 171-2. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.t01-1-00052
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Five questions--What should be transferred to decision makers? To whom should it be transferred? By whom? How? With what effect?--provide an organizing framework for a knowledge transfer strategy. Opportunities for improving how research organizations transfer research knowledge can be found in the differences between the answers suggested by our understanding of the research literature and those provided by research-organization directors asked to describe what they do. In Canada, these opportunities include developing actionable messages for decision makers (only 30 percent of research organizations frequently or always do this), developing knowledge-uptake skills in target audiences and knowledge-transfer skills in research organizations (only 20 to 22 percent frequently or always do this), and evaluating the impact of knowledge-transfer activities (only 8 to 12 percent frequently or always conduct an evaluation). Research funders can help research organizations take advantage of these opportunities.

Download full-text


Available from: John N. Lavis, Jan 02, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given the significant and irreversible impacts of climate change on communities and the environment, there is increasing focus on how to best support decision-makers to adapt to climate change. Generally, the research on this tends to focus on assessing how decision-makers navigate elements of risk and uncertainty in deciding to what extent they should adapt their practice if at all, however, scientific researchers also have a key role to play in supporting these adaptation decisions. Given the applied nature of adaptation research, we argue that an examination of the roles and responsibilities of researchers is critical to understanding the ethical aspects of professional research practice in the adaptation context. This includes identifying how researchers can best support adaptation, and exploring the responsibilities that researchers have, not only to decision-makers but also to the broader membership of the adaptation community. In this paper we examine the ethical responsibility of researchers in supporting decision-makers to adapt to climate change, using agricultural producers as a case-study and focal group. Specifically, in undertaking this examination of risk and responsibility in adaptation research and decision-making, we use the lens of professional ethics to outline how research might better contribute to informed adaptation. We argue that clarifying the distinction between the research and operational aspects of agricultural adaptation, and how the interface between the two is disclosed, is critical. We also describe and explore the ethical considerations of researchers associated with stakeholder engagement in relation to adaptation science, and identify the need for institutional innovation for more effective engagement. In doing so, we seek to demonstrate how ethical research practice can support greater alignment of science and public values in agricultural adaptation, thus increasing the likely success of decisions.
    Global Environmental Change 04/2015; 32:200-210. DOI:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.011 · 6.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent policy initiatives in the UK and internationally have sought to promote knowledge translation between the ‘producers’ and ‘users’ of research. Within this paper we explore how boundary-spanning interventions used within such initiatives can support knowledge translation between diverse groups. Using qualitative data from a 3-year research study conducted from January 2010 to December 2012 of two case-sites drawn from the CLAHRC initiative in the UK, we distinguish two different approaches to supporting knowledge translation; a ‘bridging’ approach that involves designated roles, discrete events and activities to span the boundaries between communities, and a ‘blurring’ approach that de-emphasises the boundaries between groups, enabling a more continuous process of knowledge translation as part of day-to-day work-practices. In this paper, we identify and differentiate these boundary-spanning approaches and describe how they emerged from the context defined by the wider CLAHRC networks. This highlights the need to develop a more contextualised analysis of the boundary-spanning that underpins knowledge translation processes, relating this to the distinctive features of a particular case.
    Social Science [?] Medicine 04/2014; 106:119–127. DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.01.025 · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the last decade, researchers in the social sciences have increasingly adopted neuroscientific techniques, with the consequent rise of research inspired by neuroscience in disciplines such as economics, marketing, decision sciences, and leadership. In 2007, we introduced the term organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN), in an attempt to clearly demarcate research carried out in these many areas, and provide an overarching paradigm for research utilizing cognitive neuroscientific methods, theories, and concepts, within the organizational and business research fields. Here we will revisit and further refine the OCN paradigm, and define an approach where we feel the marriage of organizational theory and neuroscience will return even greater dividends in the future and that is within the field of clinical practice.
    Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 12/2013; 7:808. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00808 · 2.90 Impact Factor