Step KTA 7.D

Select and implement interventions to overcome barriers.

Navigate Findings

Primary findings

Barriers

Organizational executives often favour incremental implementation of new ideas (research findings). Researchers need to demonstrate sensitivity in these situations and offer complementary strategies, tools and techniques.
Lessons from a health research network evaluation.
(View full citation)

Carriers

In some cases, and where possible, it may be advisable to translate and apply knowledge in small units, rather than all at once. The knowledge user is less likely to be overwhelmed, and incremental application of the knowledge enables the user to see immediate benefits. ‘Tricking’ is a helpful metaphor for the thinking about how the process works.
Case study.
(View full citation)

Knowledge translation literacy — Research methods and results- Researchers must take step to inform stakeholder about research methods and their implications in stakeholder-accessible language. One approach that can be used is to involve stakeholders in the co-writing of a plain language research summary.
Knowledge translation competencies for transdisciplinary health practice.
(View full citation)

Methods

According to the researcher’s guide to planning for knowledge translation there are five essential elements of knowledge translation, including: the problem (the problem or issue to be addressed by the research/knowledge), context (the circumstances surrounding the user and researcher), knowledge (properties of the pre-existing knowledge/evidence about the problem or the generation of new knowledge/evidence), intervention (specific activities designed to translate knowledge/research into action), and use (ways in which the knowledge/research is or might be used). For each element, a series of questions is provided. Each question encourages the researcher to think broadly and deeply about the knowledge translation implications. Elements and related questions are evidence-based, which adds to their credibility.
Knowledge translation guidance for researchers.
(View full citation)

Knowledge brokering — supplementing in-person brokering services with an electronic network can enhance stakeholder interaction and knowledge sharing. Networks can be used to optimize project time and resources. Useful network features include, tailored literature retrieval; collaborative evidence appraisal, interpretation and application; and other facilitated group-oriented interactions (e.g., teleconferencing, webinars).
Description of knowledge broker roles.
(View full citation)

One way to transfer knowledge (and best practices) is to blend knowledge (and best practices) from multiple sources into one new source (e.g., Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which also transfers executive knowledge by employing a ‘copy executive’ approach that leverages the executive onsite). Lessons learned are captured in an electronic knowledge management system (knowledge repository), that optimizes knowledge reporting through standardization and knowledge accessibility through codification and indexing. User-friendly coding systems and content submission screening techniques can maximize efficiency and minimize information overload.Culture and incentive systems should encourage sharing.
Literature review.
(View full citation)

Measures

When evaluating a research project for knowledge translation success, one useful researcher-stakeholder knowledge application (passive or active) indicator would be, knowledge being used to help create and support interventions.
Literature review.
(View full citation)

Tips

Knowledge brokers can act as bridging agents, helping researchers to understand stakeholders and their environment and helping stakeholders to understand researchers and the research project — and the mutual benefits associated with their involvement. Knowledge brokering is demanding and often difficult work. Knowledge brokers can benefit from the availability of a formal support infrastructure, adequate resourcing, and allocations of time that enable them to build and sustain an understanding of researcher and stakeholders operations. Knowledge brokers may also be good candidates for co-authorship of scholarly papers and co-presenters at workshops or conferences.
Lessons learned from close researcher-stakeholder partnerships.
(View full citation)

Research execution: Face-to-face engagement with stakeholders and active participation in community-based activities can be effective KT strategies.
Applying integrated KT in Mental Health research.
(View full citation)

Stakeholder engagement strategies must be tailored to each stakeholder group. Strategies to engage strategic direction-setters will be different from strategies required to engage perception-influencers and/or adopters.
Literature review and case example.
(View full citation)

Storytelling is often a very effective technique for getting stakeholders’ attention.
Project evaluation findings.
(View full citation)

The inherently complex nature of knowledge translation implies that, to be comprehensive, there would need to be an equally complex set of knowledge translation guidelines. This is not practical for design or practice, as it could involve a significant number of permutations and combinations and could easily overwhelm a researcher — especially a novice one. One alternative is to provide a simple template that explains the essential knowledge translation guideline categories (e.g. problem statement, research context, knowledge objectives, possible research interventions, and potential knowledge uses) and associates sample questions and hypothetical examples with each category to reinforce deliberation, understanding and application.
Knowledge translation guidance for researchers.
(View full citation)

Secondary findings

Barriers

Knowledge users may resist new knowledge (research findings) if it conflicts with existing organizational or political interests. Information or research findings that are consistent with our values or expectations tend to be accepted, while information that is inconsistent tends to be challenged, questioned, and often disregarded. It has been argued that the importance of alignment between research findings and institutional context should not be underestimated.
Source: Scheel (2003); Thomas (1993); Denis (2002); Lomas (2000). In: Ginsburg, L.R., Lewis, S., Zackheim, L. & Casebeer, A. (2207)

Researchers that use the integrated KT (which leverages the involvement of key stakeholders from research inception to completion) process may encounter several challenges when they attempt to use research evidence to influence government policy in program delivery. Research evidence competes for the attention of policy-makers with other influencers, such as, public opinion, institutional constraints and fiscal constraints. Researchers can strengthen the likelihood of KT success by better understanding the policy-making process, regularly interacting with policy-makers, building trusted relationships and partnerships, and engaging in the timely communication of research findings.
Source: Waddell (2005). In: McGrath, P.J., Lingley-Pottie, P., Johnson Emberly, D., Thurston,C., McLean, C. (2009)

Carriers

Annual community forums can be an effective way to engage a community. Forums can be targeted at prioritizing research actions or on knowledge transfer related to research results. Common objectives are to facilitate mutual learning and collaboration among research and community members and to improve research outcomes and the dissemination of research findings by providing knowledge transfer around the policy and research process to the community. Typically, forums are conducted from half to a full day and include 80–100 research knowledge producers and users.
Source: Birdsell (2002); Dunnett (2004); Williams (2005). In: Williams, A., Holden, B., Krebs, P., Muhajarine, N., Waygood, K.,Randall, J. & Spence, C. (2008)

Methods

One way to transfer knowledge (and best practices) is to make a clone of the original — copying all physical/functional inputs, processes and equipment and outputs (products/services). Examples include developing a template that captures the knowledge and practices and re-applying them (e.g., 7-11 store, McDonalds restaurants, etc.) or making an exact copy (e.g., Intel chip fabrication). This approach is often used to transfer knowledge vertically (e.g., from R&D to manufacturing). Critics raise concerns that the ‘copying’ approach removes (and erodes) employee judgment and problem-solving skills. There are also concerns about the amount of time that may be required to develop a complete template.
Source: Matson (2003). In: Lu, I.Y., Moa, C.J. & Wang, C.H. (2010)

Social interactions are essential for knowledge transfer and the transfer of tacit knowledge is an essential component of learning complex tasks. Tacit knowledge can only be transferred through detailed discussions among people from similar backgrounds and with common experiences.
Source: Nonaka (1994). In: Koners, U., & Goffin, K. (2007)

Tips

When designing a knowledge translation communication strategy, researchers should consider factors associated with the content of the communication (what will be delivered) and what resources and supporting materials are needed.
Source: Winkler (1985); CRD (1994, 2009); National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (1996, 2001); Scullion (2002); Lavis (2003); Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (2004); Carpenter (2005); Bauman (2006); Formoso (2007); Friese (2009); Majdzadeh (2008), Hughes (2000); Harmsworth (2001). In: Wilson, P.M., Petticrew, M., Calnan, M. W. & Nazareth, I. (2010)

When designing a knowledge translation communication strategy, researchers should consider: relevant factors associated with how the knowledge is expected to be used by stakeholders (e.g., practitioners, policy makers), provision of a set of practical implementation tools, and the value of establishing communities or networks to facilitate use.
Source: National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (1996, 2001); Carpenter (2005); Hughes (2000); Yuan (2010). In: Wilson, P.M., Petticrew, M., Calnan, M. W. & Nazareth, I. (2010)