Building informal knowledge‐sharing relationships between policy makers and academics: Insights from a PM&C engagement project

Abstract

This article outlines an innovative project to encourage knowledge sharing and engagement between academics and a policy team within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C). The project was designed to enhance policy advice by drawing on a group of academics outside the policy ranks to act as a sounding board, to question, and provide differing perspectives within the policy process of crafting advice to government. External expertise and particularly academic research has the potential to improve evidence‐based policy but often fails to be specific or timely for those at the “pointy end” of policy decision making. An informal knowledge sharing framework has the potential to improve the exchange of information through confidential and targeted conversations between researchers and public servants as one way of overcoming these barriers.

Stepping out of the Comfort Zone? Challenges, Advantages and Good Practices When Conducting Academic-Practitioner Research

“…Another concern that may disrupt collaboration, or that makes academic researchers reluctant to collaborate with practitioners in the first place, is the maintenance of academic independence (Quayle & Kelly, 2019). Within the academic world, academic independence or academic freedom is considered as summum bonum or 'the higher good' as it is crucial for conducting credible research and developing (scientific) knowledge (Barnes, 2018;Steenhout, 2013).…”

“…In recent decades, many countries of the global North such as the UK and Belgium have established stronger institutional links between practitioners and academic researchers (Newman et al, 2016;Quayle & Kelly, 2019). On the one hand, practitioners (e.g.…”

“…From the practitioners' perspective, these barriers may, for example, relate to confidentiality issues inherent to national security or professional secrecy, the risk of harming their clients (e.g. when being interviewed concerning abuse), the different goals or agendas of both parties and the ability to trust all partners (Newman et al, 2016;Quayle & Kelly, 2019). Particularly vulnerable groups of people can be distrustful towards researchers (e.g.…”

“…1 Although there has been an emerging academic interest in the gap between scientific knowledge and policy and practice in recent years (e.g. Aksoy et al, 2019;Amabile et al, 2001;Head, 2010;Quayle & Kelly, 2019;Talbot & Talbot, 2015), we note that an overview of advantages, challenges and, more importantly, good practices to encourage and facilitate collaboration between academics and practitioners is still needed. Such good practices merit more attention in the literature.…”

Building a knowledge‐sharing system: Innovation, Replication, Co‐production and Trust – a Response

“…Improving the quality and quantity of interactions between policymakers and academics continues to exercise contributors from all sides who wish to build more and better bridges between the worlds of research and practice. The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet's (PM&C)s intervention on this issue (Quayle & Kelly, ) is extremely welcome, not only because of the pivotal role the department plays in the Australian Public Service (APS), but also because of its determination to offer something innovative and replicable in the policy/academy bridge‐building business.…”