Anneliese Poetz Knowledge Translation and Social Media for research scientists - Part 1 of 2 - September 28, 2013

  • 231 views
Uploaded on

Part 1 - slides from September 28, 2013 workshop on Knowledge Translation and Social Media for translating Basic Science and other research via channels such as social media. This workshop was free …

Part 1 - slides from September 28, 2013 workshop on Knowledge Translation and Social Media for translating Basic Science and other research via channels such as social media. This workshop was free for NeuroDevNet trainees prior to the annual Brain Development Conference, held in Vancouver, British Columbia Canada.

This slide deck represents the first half of the workshop - an overview of Knowledge Translation and its dependence on relationship building both in-person and online via social media.

More in: Education , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
231
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. WORKING TOGETHER FOR HEALTHY BRAINS Introduction to Knowledge Translation Anneliese Poetz, PhD – Manager, KT Core NeuroDevNet Saturday September 28, 2013 www.neurodevnet.ca
  • 2. Presentation Overview 1. What is Knowledge Translation (KT)? 2. Common characteristics of various knowledge  translation models 3. Other considerations when doing KT 4.   Relationship‐based Model for KT 5.   NeuroDevNet KT Core Services
  • 3. 1. What is Knowledge Translation?
  • 4. Knowledge Translation (KT) Otherwise known as: ‐ Knowledge Translation and Exchange (KTE) ‐ Knowledge Transfer Exchange and Exploitation  (KTEE) ‐ Knowledge Synthesis Transfer and Exchange  (KSTE) ‐ Knowledge Mobilization (KMb)
  • 5. Knowledge Translation Knowledge Transfer vs. Knowledge Translation Knowledge transfer: Embraced by the evidence‐based medicine  movement One‐dimensional communication of knowledge • • The Push where researchers actively disseminate their research The Pull where the needs of knowledge users contribute to  moving knowledge into action new knowledge or evidence (improved outcome)
  • 6. But in reality… new knowledge or evidence social environmental ethical political organizational legal (improved outcome)
  • 7. CIHR’s Definition of  Knowledge Translation ... a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis,  dissemination, exchange and ethically‐sound application of  knowledge to improve the health of Canadians, provide more  effective health services and products and strengthen the health  care system. This process takes place within a complex system of interactions  between researchers and knowledge users which may vary in  intensity, complexity and level of engagement depending on the  nature of the research and the findings as well as the needs of the  particular knowledge user.
  • 8. CIHR KT Process: Dissemination • Identifying the appropriate audience and tailoring the message and medium to the audience • Dissemination activities may include: - Summaries for/briefings to stakeholders - Educational sessions with patients, practitioners and/or  policy makers - Engaging knowledge users in developing and executing  dissemination/implementation plan, tools creation, and  media engagement
  • 9. CIHR KT Process: Exchange • • Collaborative problem‐solving Interaction between the knowledge user and the  researcher, resulting in mutual learning through the  process of planning, producing, dissemination, and  applying existing or new research in decision‐making
  • 10. CIHR KT Process: Application • • Iterative process through which knowledge is put into practice Ethically‐sound application of knowledge needs to be consistent  with ethical principles and norms, social values, as well as legal  and regulatory frameworks • Keep in mind: principles, values and laws can compete  among one another at any given point in time Evaluation and monitoring of KT initiatives, processes, and  activities are key components of the KT process.
  • 11. CIHR’s Knowledge to Action Model
  • 12. Two Types of KT at CIHR 1)  End‐of‐grant KT • The researcher develops and implements a plan for making  knowledge users aware of the knowledge that was gained during a  project. • Typical dissemination and communication activities: KT to peers,  e.g. conference presentation and publications in peer‐reviewed  journals. • More intensive dissemination activities: summary briefings to  stakeholders, interactive educational sessions with patients,  practitioners and/or policy makers, media engagement, or the use  of knowledge brokers. • The commercialization of scientific discoveries is another form of  end of grant KT.
  • 13. Two Types of KT at CIHR (Cont’d) 2)  Integrated KT (IKT) • Stakeholders or potential research knowledge users are engaged  to shape the research process.  - Determine the research questions Decide on the methodology Be involved in data collection and tools development Interpret the findings Help disseminate research results  • IKT = collaborative research, action‐oriented research, co‐ production of knowledge • IKT should produce research findings that are more likely be  relevant to and used by the end users.
  • 14. 2. Common Characteristics of   Knowledge Translation Models
  • 15. Common Characteristics  of KT models • Inclusive conceptualization of knowledge ‐ Both research evidence and practical tacit knowledge should  be considered, and included where possible. • Stakeholder engagement ‐ Where possible, through the entire process from knowledge  generation (research), synthesis, dissemination and exchange • Interactions across jurisdiction or sectors
  • 16. Common Characteristics (cont’d) • Communication (and also risk communication) ‐ Tailor your message and medium to the intended audience  (knowledge user) • Context is VERY important! ‐ Be aware of the social, legal, environmental, ethical, political  and organizational factors that influences knowledge  utilization ‐ Important to engage stakeholders who know best!
  • 17. 3. Other considerations when doing KT
  • 18. Other considerations for KT • Knowledge produced varies greatly in terms of its readiness for  utilization.  ‐ E.g. Knowledge emerged from basic research will likely require  further research before they can be considered for adoption and  application. • There is often a disconnect between education institutions and  knowledge users in their attitude toward generation of knowledge. - For most human activities, knowledge must be used before there  are economic and social returns. Whereas the act of generating  new knowledge in academic environments is deemed to be a  worthwhile cultural activity, even if the knowledge is not  immediately useful. - Implications on messages to the audience
  • 19. 4. Relationship‐based model for KT
  • 20. How high is the cliff?
  • 21. Relationship building Poetz,A. (2012).  “Risk is a social thing, not just a mathematical thing:” a model for stakeholder  engagement in decision making. Risk, Hazards and Crisis in Public Policy.  3(2): Article 4
  • 22. Perception of Risk • “Perception is reality” • Higher risk perception = higher potential for  conflict • Lower level of understanding = higher risk  perception • Poor quality relationship = lower trust  • Lower trust = higher risk perception
  • 23. Potential for Conflict • Poor/non‐effective communication = high  potential for conflict • Collaboration = type of conflict mgmt Types: ‐ Can be positive or negative ‐ Avoidance (withdraw from the relationship) ‐ Competition (my info is more ‘right’)
  • 24. Communication • • • • Effective vs. ineffective Verbal vs. non‐verbal “listening” is also part of “communication” Source of information more important
  • 25. Understanding • • • • Comes from effective communication Not to be confused with ‘knowledge’ Misunderstanding = higher risk perception Misunderstanding = higher conflict potential
  • 26. Relationship = bridge to KT • Three key components:  – Trust – Relationship commitment – Communication • KT measured as: – Willingness of firms to share information with  other firms Ramasamy, B, K.W. Goh, M.C.H. Yeung. (2006).  Is Guanxi (relationship) a bridge to knowledge transfer? Journal of Business Research.  59: 130‐139. “Guanxi is all about the cultivation of long‐term personal relationships.” p.132
  • 27. Relationship = bridge to KT trust =      KT communication =      KT Some interaction effects between trust, relationship  commitment, and communication on KT Ramasamy, B, K.W. Goh, M.C.H. Yeung. (2006).  Is Guanxi (relationship) a bridge to knowledge transfer? Journal of Business Research.  59: 130‐139.
  • 28. KT occurs within a ‘system’ new knowledge or evidence environmental social ethical political organizational legal (improved outcome)
  • 29. Using SM for KT…it’s all about the “E” “…use social media to engage in a  conversation, not only to “pass down”  information.” “…opportunity for health professionals to  explore, listen and engage.” McNab, C. (2009). What social media offers to health professionals and citizens. Bull World Health Organ. 87: 566.
  • 30. Limitations of SM “…the establishment of a level of trust required  to facilitate the exchange of knowledge also  favours co‐presence and co‐location.” “…technologically facilitated communication  cannot at present replace the direct face‐to‐ face contact that is often a prerequisite for the  successful transfer of tacit knowledge.” Roberts, J. (2010).  From know‐how to show‐how? Questioning the role of information and communication technologies in knowledge transfer.  Technology  Analysis & Strategic Management.  12:4, 429‐443.
  • 31. What SM can do for NeuroDevNet • Expanding our reach: – Dissemination – Connecting with  practitioners/policymakers/community groups etc. • Greater participation/engagement: – Listening for gaps/needs – Exchange/feedback
  • 32. 5. NeuroDevNet KT Core Services
  • 33. Knowledge Translation Services “KT helps to maximize the impact of research  and training in neurodevelopmental disorders.”
  • 34. Knowledge Translation Services Knowledge Brokering: • Collaborations: NeuroDevNet researchers,  partners from the public, private, non‐profit  and practitioner sectors • development of NeuroDevNet corporate  networks (CoBD) • support KT planning
  • 35. Knowledge Translation Services Support for KT Events: • event planning tools &  support to NDN  researchers, trainees and  partners (including  decision‐makers) • input and support to NDN  events (e.g. annual Brain  Development Conference)
  • 36. Knowledge Translation Services Support for KT Products: • draft clear language research summaries • support social media strategies • assist NDN researchers, students and partner  organizations with videos  and arts  based KT
  • 37. Knowledge Translation Services KT Capacity Building: • KT training in person and online • identify, assess and adapt KT tools to  NeuroDevNet needs
  • 38. Knowledge Translation Services KT Evaluation Framework: • develop evaluation framework for KT • develop KT success stories
  • 39. Training/Capacity Building Expose • Students and research staff to the full‐spectrum  of neurosciences research incl. ethics,  informatics, commercialization… Enable • them to establish and develop effective  research collaborations… Equip • students and research staff with skills to  transfer research findings into tangible health,  social and economic benefits for Canadians
  • 40. 5. Key Points • Develop relationships & trust with those you  envision using your research • Ongoing & effective communication • Not just “push” of information, but “listening” • Ask KT Core for advice/tools
  • 41. WORKING TOGETHER FOR HEALTHY BRAINS Anneliese Poetz, PhD Manager – KT Core apoetz@yorku.ca 416.736.2100 x44310 www.neurodevnet.ca