Organizational Factors that Influence University-Based Researchers’ Engagement in Knowledge Transfer Activities

Abstract

Knowledge transfer has become a priority for universities and other publicly funded research institutions. However, researchers working in these settings report certain structural barriers to engaging in knowledge translation activities. This article describes these barriers, situating them in the disjunction between current expectations and the historical tradition of disciplinary authority in academia. The authors review some of the organizational solutions that have been proposed to address this disjunction. This analysis of barriers and solutions suggests that five domains of organizational policy and practice—promotion and tenure, resources and funding, structures, knowledge transfer orientation, and documentation—may be critical to promoting researchers’engagement in knowledge transfer.

The knowledge transfer from the Humanities: possibilities and characteristics

“…Otros autores han analizado los aspectos organizacionales clave que pueden favorecer o dificultar la participación de los investigadores en las actividades de transferencia de conocimiento (Lavis et al, 2003;Jacobson et al, 2004); en ellos se destaca que esta actividad debe estar contemplada entre las directrices de política científica de la institución y reflejarse en las directrices para la promoción y consolidación de la carrera científica; asimismo, desde un punto de vista más operativo, se requiere apoyo de gestión y financiación, estructuras de apoyo a la transferencia y que los mecanismos y procesos de TC sean conocidos y claros y estén documentados y estandarizados.…”

Developing a Knowledge Translation (KT) Strategy for a Centre of Childhood Disability Research: Description of the Process

“…KT is quickly becoming a priority for researchers; however, literature surrounding the processes used by research groups for planning and prioritizing KT activities is limited. Barriers to effective KT include insufficient time for researchers to adequately engage and build relationships with stakeholders and decision makers; the disconnect between the expectations of universities for promotion, tenure, and KT activities; a lack of skills and resources for developing and evaluating KT strategies; a lack of rigorous outcome measures and inadequate evidence for effective KT strategies; and a variety of contextual factors, including orientation and commitment to KT from organizations (Jacobson, Butterill, & Goering, 2004;Mitton, Adair, McKenzie, Patten, & Perry, 2007).…”

Bridging science to service: Using Rehabilitation Research and Training Center program to ensure that research-based knowledge makes a difference

“…KT activities still tend to be the least-funded aspect of research grants, and they are often an afterthought rather than a planned component of research studies [33][34]. Since most researchers are professionally rewarded (i.e., promotions and tenure) based on publication in peerreviewed journals [32,35], the transfer of research findings may be targeted to a narrow audience of professionals, which can result in inadequate communication of the findings to the practice field (e.g., publication in journals read only by researchers or use of language poorly understood by constituents beyond the research community) [35][36]. In addition, the lack of incentives results in many researchers having little training or experience with KT strategies and techniques [32].…”

“…The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) instituted the Research Infrastructure Program to expand the number of partnerships between community-based programs, clinical settings, and academic institutions to enhance our national capacity to provide evidence-based mental healthcare in community settings [31]. However, many universities and research institutions still do not place a high priority on planned KT [32], from the generation of research to the implementation of the innovation or research findings. KT activities still tend to be the least-funded aspect of research grants, and they are often an afterthought rather than a planned component of research studies [33][34].…”

“…Since most researchers are professionally rewarded (i.e., promotions and tenure) based on publication in peerreviewed journals [32,35], the transfer of research findings may be targeted to a narrow audience of professionals, which can result in inadequate communication of the findings to the practice field (e.g., publication in journals read only by researchers or use of language poorly understood by constituents beyond the research community) [35][36]. In addition, the lack of incentives results in many researchers having little training or experience with KT strategies and techniques [32]. This lack of planning is often compounded by the large lag in time between identification of findings, publication of the research, and translation into usable products.…”