Facing the challenges of research‐informed knowledge mobilization: ‘Practising what we preach’?

Abstract

The political imperative to make public services more evidence based has contributed to the growth in the past two decades of both research and practice in the field of knowledge mobilization: the range of approaches to encourage the creation, sharing and use of research‐informed knowledge alongside other forms of knowledge. Paradoxically the growth of the field has made the challenge of encouraging research use much more complex and uncertain, and the roles of knowledge mobilizers much more diverse and demanding. This in‐depth interview study of knowledge mobilization in 51 agencies concerned with knowledge for public services breaks new ground in exploring a paradox at the heart of knowledge mobilization practice: the challenges that research agencies face in practising in research‐informed ways themselves.

Knowledge mobilisation: an ethnographic study of the influence of lay mindlines on eczema self-management in primary care in the UK

“…Knowledge mobilisation (KM) can, at its simplest, be defined as ‘moving knowledge to where is can be most useful’ 1 ; it involves concerted efforts to create, share and use research and other forms of knowledge. 2 Many knowledge mobilisers recognise that knowledge sharing is relational, 3 constructed from social interaction 4 and context specific. 5 One potential KM strategy is influencing ‘mindlines’, a concept developed from extensive ethnographic work in primary care.…”

Selective permeability of boundaries in a knowledge brokering team

“…The findings of this study are likely to be applicable to a wide range of collective knowledge brokering agents, such as knowledge mobilization agencies engaged in co‐production and other forms of boundary work in the fragmented contexts of networks, partnerships and alliances (Guston ; Mørk et al ; Brown and Head ; Powell et al ). It also opens a number of avenues for future research.…”

New development: What works now? Continuity and change in the use of evidence to improve public policy and service delivery

“…In addition, potentially helpful empirical work on promising approaches is spread across different policy areas and jurisdictions and, to date, the scope for cross-sector and cross-national learning has not yet been fully realised. All of the above contributes to the paradox that many of those who seek to promote evidence use are not necessarily operating in evidence-informed ways themselves (Powell et al 2018).…”