Balancing exploration and exploitation in transferring research into practice: a comparison of five knowledge translation entity archetypes

Abstract

BackgroundTranslating knowledge from research into clinical practice has emerged as a practice of increasing importance. This has led to the creation of new organizational entities designed to bridge knowledge between research and practice. Within the UK, the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) have been introduced to ensure that emphasis is placed in ensuring research is more effectively translated and implemented in clinical practice. Knowledge translation (KT) can be accomplished in various ways and is affected by the structures, activities, and coordination practices of organizations. We draw on concepts in the innovation literature—namely exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity—to examine these structures and activities as well as the ensuing tensions between research and implementation.MethodsUsing a qualitative research approach, the study was based on 106 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with the directors, theme leads and managers, key professionals involved in research and implementation in nine CLAHRCs. Data was also collected from intensive focus group workshops.ResultsIn this article we develop five archetypes for organizing KT. The results show how the various CLAHRC entities work through partnerships to create explorative research and deliver exploitative implementation. The different archetypes highlight a range of structures that can achieve ambidextrous balance as they organize activity and coordinate practice on a continuum of exploration and exploitation.ConclusionThis work suggests that KT entities aim to reach their goals through a balance between exploration and exploitation in the support of generating new research and ensuring knowledge implementation. We highlight different organizational archetypes that support various ways to maintain ambidexterity, where both exploration and exploitation are supported in an attempt to narrow the knowledge gaps. The KT entity archetypes offer insights on strategies in structuring collaboration to facilitate an effective balance of exploration and exploitation learning in the KT process.

Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study

“…Real organisations rarely display all of the features of ideal types like our archetypes: instead, they are much more likely to show different features to varying degrees. 196 In producing these accounts we neither make nor imply any normative intent. We would resist attempts to create hierarchies of these accounts, or attempts to suggest which are best or better, even if such suggestions were made heavily contingent.…”

“…The patterns of practice contained in the archetypes present different challenges, have different strengths and are likely to be appropriate in different contexts. 196 As constructed, the archetypes are intended as descriptive and interpretive heuristics. In common with the recent use of archetypes to illuminate knowledge translation practices in the nine first-round CLAHRCs, 196 their merit lies in their capacity to aid transparency, and to reveal deeper strands of thinking that, consciously or otherwise, underpin agency activities.…”

“…196 As constructed, the archetypes are intended as descriptive and interpretive heuristics. In common with the recent use of archetypes to illuminate knowledge translation practices in the nine first-round CLAHRCs, 196 their merit lies in their capacity to aid transparency, and to reveal deeper strands of thinking that, consciously or otherwise, underpin agency activities. 197 We also hope that these archetypes will stimulate communication and debate around agency orientations, design, strategies and priorities.…”

Getting the most out of knowledge and innovation transfer agents in health care: a qualitative study

“…This study is timely because of the increasing use of KIT roles by AHSNs and partnerships, 60 and the relative lack of evidence for their effectiveness, 94 although the literature on knowledge brokers has grown significantly in the last few years with the publication of evaluations of CLAHRCs 39,42,44,60,245,250,251 and other initiatives. 90 The complexity of the role and the environment in which it is played out justifies the need for more research on knowledge brokers.…”

What Do the People Who Use the Research Results Think? Attempting Integrated Knowledge Translation in the 'Knowledge Creation' Phase

“…Empirical examples of the successful use of iKT can, however, be found in the literature [9,10]. These range from improved communication, enhanced skills and confidence [10], and increased professional development [11].…”