issues work: understanding the ke landscape
To provide an effective programme of support for knowledge exchange, ISSUES has undertaken work to understand the KE landscape and document the issues pertinent to knowledge transfer and exchange for SUE. In practice this has meant investigating the following areas:
- Understanding the perspectives of the SUE researchers in relation to KE
- Understanding types of outputs generated by SUE
- Understanding the needs and perspectives of practitioners & policy makers in relation to acquisition of new knowledge
- Understanding the approach to KE used by other organisations
Understanding the perspectives of the SUE researchers in relation to KE
The ISSUES team held face to face discussions with the Principal Investigators (PIs) of the SUE 1 and SUE2 consortia in 2007 and late 2008 respectively. These meetings were based around a semi-structured series of questions designed to explore knowledge transfer issues using the experience of SUE PI's and their researchers.
The ISSUES team also hosted events in September 2007 and November 2008 for members of the consortia to enable researchers to exchange their views and experience of good practice in research dissemination.
Understanding types of outputs generated by SUE
The ISSUES team also compiled, summarised and categorized all outputs to date from the SUE 1 consortia. This work gave an initial picture of the spread of activities undertaken by consortia, and their distribution across the spectrum from ¡®academic-oriented¡¯ to ¡®practitioner and policy-maker oriented¡¯. The approach taken deliberately avoided any value judgements about the likely impact of different dissemination activities. All consortia had a good range of dissemination activity and outputs likely to reach academic audiences. However, consortia varied as to how much 'practitioner-oriented dissemination work had been undertaken.
The ISSUES Team have also recently produced distilled summaries of some of the outputs from completed SUE 1 Consortia. Click here to access these summaries.
Understanding practitioner needs
ISSUES has conducted two sets of practitioner oriented surveys, one directed specifically at the construction industry, and another directed at a wider group of stakeholders including policy makers. Some initial barriers have been perceived to include
- Different timescales (research taking years, while practitioners need results in months)
- Different media used by practitioners (e-bulletins and trade journals) and academics (results generally published in peer-reviewed academic journals that are not generally used by practitioners)
- KE was perceived to be highly dependent on personal networks and relationships. New information was commonly acquired by 'word of mouth', from colleagues, clients and contractors
- Corporate time pressures frequently prevented practitioners from engaging in research projects, or from attending events and seminars
Understanding the approach of knowledge exchange practitioners
The ISSUES Team has interviewed a small number of people and groups who have a particular role in knowledge exchange between researchers and practitioners and policy makers, including those working with policy making units, including RERAD of the Scottish Government, and Research Commissioning Bodies such as SNIFFER (Scottish and Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research). Initial findings include:
- Knowledge Exchange is highly personal, and personal contacts are the most effective route for dissemination
- Notwithstanding the above, word-of-mouth (including colleague to colleague, and client to consultant) is seen to be important in the uptake of new ideas and new areas of knowledge and work
- Research commissioned by a specific end-user group is more likely to be used than other research
- Contribution to expert advisory groups can be an effective means of KT for researchers
- Likewise, responding to consultations and enquiries, indicating the respondent's title and role in specific research can also be an effective means of KT
|
