Managing the Knowledge Exchange Process, Razia Shariff & Naomi Landau, IKT 2013
•Descargar como POT, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•429 vistas
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (19)
Similar a Managing the Knowledge Exchange Process, Razia Shariff & Naomi Landau, IKT 2013
Similar a Managing the Knowledge Exchange Process, Razia Shariff & Naomi Landau, IKT 2013 (20)
Más de Third Sector Research Centre
Más de Third Sector Research Centre (20)
Managing the Knowledge Exchange Process, Razia Shariff & Naomi Landau, IKT 2013
- 1. Managing the Knowledge Exchange Process Innovation through Knowledge Transfer 2013 Razia Shariff & Naomi Landau Third Sector Research Centre
- 2. An intro to TSRC • National research centre set up to research voluntary, community and social enterprise • Broad spectrum of research, including: – service delivery, ‘below the radar’, social enterprise – Policy context, economic and social impact, workforce and volunteers – Qualitative and quantitative - new data sets, longitudinal case study research • Funded by ESRC, Office for Civil Society and Barrow Cadbury Trust • Universities of Birmingham and Southampton
- 3. The impact of Knowledge Exchange? Knowledge Exchange Team: • Set up to help research to have an impact • ‘Exchange’ approach: achieve impact by involving stakeholders throughout the research, two-way/ circular process Aims of paper: • How KE process leads to impact: activities, conditions, contextual factors • 3 case studies
- 4. Knowledge Exchange Impact Matrix Fewer Stakeholders More Stakeholders Meaningful KE Dissemination of research knowledge Webinars CLG event Website BtR11 Reference Group Research Fellows FSS Equalities Event Press release * CBC Policy Circle Specialist Seminars with partners Stand at ACEVO Presentations at Conferences * * Journal articles * Media coverage Radio 4 Other published reports * Joint conferences *
- 5. K* spectrum Below the radar: process impact Qualitative: conceptual impact Social enterprise: instrumental impact
- 6. Variables to think about Need to know the existing networks of researchers and their level of engagement with stakeholders Need to understand the appetite in policy and practice for the research findings Different types of research lend themselves well to different types of KE interventions We need to consider: relational processes, conceptual problematics mechanisms to generate impact.
- 7. Reflections Need to Understand: the nature of the research, what and who it wants to influence The researchers propensity to engage with stakeholders The current context and appetite for the research knowledge
- 8. Conclusions Relational activity and co-production key KE must be inter twinned throughout the research process in order to generate impact Need to think about how to influence action, the TSRC Futures Dialogues offers possibilities for the future
Notas del editor
- Two way process –Research not just disseminated to stakeholders, but stakeholders also feed into and inform the research. And circular process – where research and stakeholders are continually informed by each other. Paper aims to explore how KE process leads to impact – not only what activities are important, but what conditions, contextual factors effect how they work. Does this by analysing three case studies, which it maps using two knowledge exchange frameworks – the Knowledge Exchange and Impact matrix, developed as part of our own analysis of our work, and the K* spectrum developed by the international K* conference in 2012.
- This model maps KE roles and activities by what function they fulfil. From infomational – dissemination, to relational – translating and co-producing knowledge, to systems – influencing wider context. The below the radar case study relational function was particularly important. It involved coproduction of research and learning, through a reference group, fellowships, joint events. Fact that knowledge was coproduced allowed it to be embedded within the stakeholder communities and therefore directly influence the thinking of community practitioners, funders etc. In the Social Enterprise case study the informational and relational was important. The KET activities concentrated on sharing information, publicising research, organising events to share findings. They also facilitated relational functions, organising meetings with policy makers for example. But here, the researchers role was particularly important – using their own networks to coproduce research and work with policy-makers. These relational activities were important in affecting thinking within government policy – (systems function.) Quantitative case study was highly focused on the informational function – through press, website, events which allowed the research concepts such as the ‘civic core’ and distribution of public funding to be shared widely, and influence thinking within the third sector and policy. Concentrated on sharing and publicising the information, rather than coproducing it. The spectrum isn’t always linear – in qualitative case study, for example, informational activities helped to have a systems impact by influencing the wider context of public and policy debate. The research was referenced a number of times in media and by politicians. All case studies involved activities across the spectrum, although some focused more on one part. E.g. The process of disseminating knowledge in the conceptual case study was helped by coproducing events and using networks, and dissemination activities such as media and social media helped to broaden the reach of co-produced knowledge in the below the radar case study.