How practitioner-led research could have greater impact: the importance of considering knowledge mobilisation holistically

Lightowler, Claire; Stocks-Rankin, Catherine-Rose; Wilkinson, Heather

doi:10.1332/174426417x14987303892424

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our review, 15 studies (30% of 49) used specific frameworks to extract KMb capacities or to design interventions based on their contextual characteristics (e.g., resources). The UK MRC Framework for Complex Interventions (Straus et al, 2011), Diffusion of Innovations and Institutional Theory (Allen et al, 2013), Levin's model of research impact (Cooper, 2014), Embedded Scholar: Enabler, Enactor and Engagement Model (Chan et al, 2017), Capacity-Opportunity-Motivation model (Yanovitzky and Blitz, 2017), evidence-informed public health process (Dobbins et al, 2018;Dobbins et al, 2019), knowledgeto-action and behavior change theory (Moore et al, 2018;Green et al, 2012), developmental evaluation (Harper and Dickson, 2019), PARiSH KMb framework (Lachance et al, 2019), the holistic model of knowledge mobilization (Lightowler et al, 2018), SPIRIT Action Framework (Williamson et al, 2019), active implementation frameworks (Wolfe et al, 2019), knowledge boundaries, organizational learning, and absorptive capacity (Oborn et al, 2013) were among the cited frameworks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capacity development for knowledge mobilization: a scoping review of the concepts and practices

Golhasany

Harvey

2023

Humanit Soc Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing emphasis worldwide on the use of knowledge mobilization (KMb) to improve policies and practices with the latest research evidence. This emphasis calls upon knowledge producers (e.g., university researchers) to produce more relevant evidence, and knowledge users (e.g., practitioners) to access and apply evidence. However, doing KMb can be challenging for these groups without effective support and training. Therefore, individuals and organizations are undertaking capacity development interventions to facilitate the KMb process with more effective support structures, skills, and incentives. Despite its recognized importance, theoretical evidence and practical guidance on capacity development for KMb are scattered across disciplines and practices. To address this, we conducted a scoping review study to review the current practices and concepts and identify significant gaps. One-thousand six-hundred thirty records were gathered, and 105 peer-reviewed and gray literature documents from 2010 to 2020 were reviewed. Two reviewers worked independently in screening the records, and one researcher analyzed the retained documents. The analysis reveals that capacity development for KMb is a multidimensional and multiscalar concept and practice with a diverse range of initiators, initiatives, and beneficiaries. This study also reports on three thematic areas of significance emerging from the literature, namely: (a) individuals’ and organizations’ challenges in doing and supporting KMb, (b) the capacities and supports deemed needed for effective KMb, and (c) the strategies being used for delivering capacity development. Furthermore, this study identifies evidence gaps related to the process aspects of capacity development for KMb (i.e., planning), capacity development initiatives being undertaken in developing country contexts, and results from more formal evaluations of KMb capacity-building effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capacity development for knowledge mobilization: a scoping review of the concepts and practices

Golhasany

Harvey

2023

Humanit Soc Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, we question the extent to which the project's research findings will be transformed into action, which raises the question of whether practitioners should be bothered to get involved in research, as it might be a waste of time. This is unsurprising, as there has been little to no research on the relationship between social work practitioner research and policy change (Lightowler et al, 2018). However, Sophia's and Salil's perspectives suggest that inroads can be made within individual organisations, especially if there are initiatives already in place.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflections from members of a collaborative social work practitioner–academic research team investigating the career progression experiences of black social workers

Moseley,

Taylor,

Wilson

et al. 2024

Critical and Radical Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article shares the reflections of members of a collaborative practitioner–academic research team in social work. The team investigated the career progression experiences of black social workers working in statutory social work services in South-East London. Our intention in this article is to share our experience of researching a subject that holds emotional and political resonance. We do so by offering individual perspectives from different team members on how their project involvement affected them both personally and professionally. We also discuss some of the general themes identified in our reflections. These include practitioners growing in research confidence, the need to create a safe emotional space for stories of researcher discomfort and uncertainty to be heard, the effects of undertaking research on professional social work identity, and curiosity about whether our research endeavours can change social work career progression policies and practices for black social work colleagues. We caution that a safe emotional container is required when researching personally and professionally sensitive, subjects such as racism and discrimination in social work. We hope that our article inspires social work practitioners to become involved in research activities.

show abstract

“…An emotional or intuitive connection is required to break through the tacit understanding and stories can help with this (Sole and Wilson 2002). This is now increasingly recognised as dependent on organisational culture and embedded systemic processes which impact on frontline behaviours and practices (Rycroft Malone 2004, Nutley et al 2007, Patterson et al 2011, Lightowler et al 2018.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Story, dialogue and caring about what matters to people: progress towards evidence-enriched policy and practice

Andrews

Gabbay

Le-May

et al. 2020

Evidence &Amp; Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence-based practice in social care and health is widely promoted. Making it a reality remains challenging, largely because practitioners generally see practice-based knowledge as more relevant than empirical research. A further challenge regarding the creative, contextual use of research and other evidence including lived experience and practice-based knowledge is that practitioners, especially in frontline care services, are often seen not as innovators, but recipients of rules and guidelines or followers of predetermined plans. Likewise, older people are not generally recognised as co-creators of knowledge, learning and development but as passive recipients of care, or objects of research. This paper outlines a participatory action research project which brought together researchers, social care and health practitioners, managers, older people and carers in six sites across Wales and Scotland. Working collaboratively, and using a dialogic storytelling approach, they explored and addressed seven already published research-based ‘Challenges’ regarding what matters most to older people with high-support needs. Taking a participatory, caring and emergent approach, participants discovered and addressed five elements required in developing evidence-enriched practice: the creation of supportive and relationship-centred research and practice environments; the valuing of diverse types of evidence; the use of engaging narratives to capture and share evidence; the use of dialogue-based approaches to learning and development; and the recognition and resolution of systemic barriers to development. Although existing literature covers each element, this project was novel in collectively exploring and addressing all five elements together, and in its use of multiple forms of story, which engaged hearts and minds. Key messages <ul><li>People meaningfully engage with research evidence if they feel valued and have agency to lead their own learning</li> <li>People engage with research evidence when they can relate it to their own knowledge and experience</li> <li>Research evidence presented in story format is accessible and can act as a catalyst for dialogue-learning</li> <li>Dialogue-learning, stimulated by stories, supports the co-creation of knowledge and policy</li></ul>

show abstract

How practitioner-led research could have greater impact: the importance of considering knowledge mobilisation holistically

Cited by 7 publications

References 40 publications

Capacity development for knowledge mobilization: a scoping review of the concepts and practices

Capacity development for knowledge mobilization: a scoping review of the concepts and practices

Reflections from members of a collaborative social work practitioner–academic research team investigating the career progression experiences of black social workers

Story, dialogue and caring about what matters to people: progress towards evidence-enriched policy and practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About