Full citation

Bowen, S., Martens, P. & The Need to Know Team. (2005). Demystifying Knowledge Translation: Learning From the Community. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(4), 203-211.

Format: Peer-reviewed article

Type: Research — Non-experimental

Experience level of reader: Fundamental

Annotation: The authors use the evaluation of the five-year, community-based project Need to Know to answer questions like: ‘What are the characteristics of effective knowledge translation?’ and ‘In what contexts is knowledge translation more successful?’ The goals of Need to Know are to create new knowledge that is directly relevant to the needs of rural and northern regional health authorities; to develop useful models for health information infrastructure, training and interaction; and, to disseminate and apply health-related research that will improve health services and health outcomes.

Setting(s) to which the reported activities/findings are relevant: Community, University

Knowledge user(s) to whom the piece of literature may be relevant: Researchers

Knowledge user level addressed by the literature: Organization

This article uses the Commercial Devices and Services version of the NtK Model

Primary Findings

Barriers:

  • An absence of trust between researchers and stakeholders can impede knowledge translation. Negative perceptions or past experiences of researchers or stakeholders can adversely influence the start-up and continuity of a research project. Be sure to probe early and often during interactions between researcher and stakeholders for signs of skepticism or mistrust and have strategies available to remedy them.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: KTA Step 1.C, KTA Step 2.C, KTA Step 3.C
  • Factors that may limit or impede the ability of knowledge translation to positively impact stakeholder behavior and decision-making include the resources required by an organization to apply the knowledge; the compatibility of the leadership style and organizational culture; the alignment of existing organization structures and processes; and the impact of organizational politics. Researchers may be better positioned to influence these factors if they secure training for, and experience with organizational change.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: KTA Step 1.C, KTA Step 2.C, KTA Step 3.C
  • Researchers and stakeholders are usually able to quickly identify situations where rhetoric has replaced agreed upon and expected project behavior. Rhetoric often triggers mistrust and a re-evaluation of commitments in response. Consider ‘partnering’ in collaborative research as one example. Partnering with stakeholders is a relatively new trend in research. Researchers and stakeholders must be able to consistently demonstrate, through their words and actions that genuine partnering behavior will occur. This can be challenging, especially early in the project when the capabilities of the respective parties are not fully known to each other. Creating formal (e.g., joint development of deliverables) and informal (e.g., social events) opportunities for parties to interact can help to provide evidence of agreed upon behavior or provide a shared platform to challenge exceptions.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: KTA Step 1.C, KTA Step 2.C, KTA Step 3.C, Step 3.1, Step 2.2, Step 1.1

Carriers:

  • Developing a shared project language and culture among researchers and stakeholders can enhance the potential for project success. Early in the project, researchers and stakeholders should take the time to orientate each other regarding their respective environments and operating terminologies. As one example of shared language, it is important that all parties understand what knowledge translation is and how it will be actualized by the project. Be prepared to negotiate a common project language and culture.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 1.2
  • While collaboration and interaction with stakeholders are hallmarks of effective research, it is often the case that the personal/human factors are the ones that dictate related successes or failures. When soliciting partnerships, researchers should pay close attention to their own and each party’s capacity for cooperation and collaboration and understand the consequences of its presence or absence.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 3.1
  • In research projects, effective relationship-building often plays a crucial role in adequately preparing researchers and stakeholders for joint activities such as agreeing on project deliverables, responsibilities and their execution. Relationship-building can be facilitated by open dialogue about project objectives and it can evolve through mutually agreed upon project processes and practices
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 3.1

Tips

  • Storytelling is often a very effective technique for getting stakeholders’ attention.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: KTA Step 1.D, KTA Step 2.D, KTA Step 3.D
  • During the research planning stage, it can be very challenging to accurately estimate the amount of time that will be required for building trust and evolving shared understanding and goals, especially if there has been no prior interaction with stakeholders. There is a tendency to under-estimate time requirements, so it may be better to err on the side on overestimating requirements.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 3.3, Step 2.2, Step 1.3
  • Researchers may be more receptive to collaborative research if the reward structures of their funding sources and organizational affiliations are structured to support collaborative research.
    Project evaluation findings.
  • Researchers may be more adept at knowledge translation if their funding sources and organizational affiliations dedicate time and resources to advancing the practice of knowledge translation.
    Project evaluation findings.
  • During the planning stage of a research project, it is important to give equal consideration to the time and resource demands that will be placed on stakeholders. Explicit recognition can build respect, trust and encourage sustained stakeholder involvement.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 2.2, Step 1.3
  • One of the benefits of stakeholder involvement in research projects is that they can learn about research. Learning can be evidence-oriented (e.g., stakeholder appreciation of research techniques and application of research findings, etc.), process-oriented (e.g., greater stakeholder awareness of data/information/knowledge sources and access protocols) attitude-oriented (e.g., a change in stakeholder views about, involvement in, and expectations of research projects and deliverables). While the researcher and stakeholders are typically explicitly focused on the evidence-oriented aspects of the project, the process- and attitude-oriented aspects may be particularly empowering and transformative for stakeholders. Indirect value may also be accrued when stakeholders take the opportunity to apply these learnings to the benefit of their own organizational contexts.
    Project evaluation findings.
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Tip 1.3, KTA Step 1.B, KTA Step 2.B, KTA Step 3.B, Step 3.1

Secondary Findings

Carriers:

  • It is important to communicate research findings in a manner that can influence stakeholders. Quality and accessibility factors play important roles. (Casebeer [2000]; McColl [1998])
    Occurrence of finding within the model: KTA Step 1.B, KTA Step 2.B, KTA Step 3.B, Step 3.8, Step 3.7
  • Knowledge translation activities benefit from involvement of stakeholders early in the research process and establishing effective working relationships with them. Where possible, provide opportunities for in-person meetings. (Roos [1999]; Lomas [2000]; Davis [1996])
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 3.1, Step 2.2, Step 1.1
  • Strive to ensure that the research project has direct relevance to the targeted knowledge users. One way to promote relevance is to engage in collaborative research, drawing upon the expertise of researchers and stakeholders. (Lomas [2000]; Davis [1996]; Mohrman [2004])
    Occurrence of finding within the model: Step 3.2, Step 2.2, Step 1.2, Step 1.1

Tip: The sole act of rendering research results understandable by stakeholders may be of limited value. Real benefits are often derived from the application of research results that respond to a specific stakeholder need. (Davis [1996]; Golden-Biddle [2003])
Occurrence of finding within the model: KTA Step 1.A, KTA Step 2.A, KTA Step 3.A, KTA Step 1.B, KTA Step 2.B, KTA Step 3.B, Step 3.2, Step 2.2, Step 1.2, Step 1.1