Missing in action? The role of the knowledge mobilisation literature in developing knowledge mobilisation practices

Alison Powell; Huw Davies; Sandra Nutley

doi:10.1332/174426416X14534671325644

Missing in action? The role of the knowledge mobilisation literature in developing knowledge mobilisation practices

Alison Powell, Huw Davies, Sandra Nutley

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Despite a burgeoning literature and the development of new theories about knowledge mobilisation in the past 15 years, findings from this online survey in 2014 of over 100 research agencies (n=106; response rate 57%) show the challenges of making effective use of formal and informal learning. Many agencies rely on traditional knowledge ‘push’ activities; formal use of theoretical models and frameworks is patchy; and knowledge-sharing between agencies and the comprehensive evaluation of knowledge mobilisation programmes are limited. Closer links between research agencies, and between these and knowledge mobilisation researchers, could enhance future knowledge mobilisation practice and theory.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	201-223
Number of pages	23
Journal	Evidence & Policy
Volume	13
Issue number	2
Early online date	22 Jan 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1332/174426416X14534671325644
Publication status	Published - May 2017

Keywords

Knowledge mobilisation
Evidence-based policy
Evidence-based practice
Research intermediation

Access to Document

10.1332/174426416X14534671325644

Powell_Davies_Nutley_Evidence_and_Policy_2016_AAM
Copyright © 2016, Policy Press. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created, accepted version manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426416X14534671325644
Accepted author manuscript, 774 KB

Cite this

@article{f7b2f8032ca54b8fb942b87b3b9fcad5,

title = "Missing in action? The role of the knowledge mobilisation literature in developing knowledge mobilisation practices",

abstract = "Despite a burgeoning literature and the development of new theories about knowledge mobilisation in the past 15 years, findings from this online survey in 2014 of over 100 research agencies (n=106; response rate 57%) show the challenges of making effective use of formal and informal learning. Many agencies rely on traditional knowledge {\textquoteleft}push{\textquoteright} activities; formal use of theoretical models and frameworks is patchy; and knowledge-sharing between agencies and the comprehensive evaluation of knowledge mobilisation programmes are limited. Closer links between research agencies, and between these and knowledge mobilisation researchers, could enhance future knowledge mobilisation practice and theory. ",

keywords = "Knowledge mobilisation, Evidence-based policy, Evidence-based practice, Research intermediation",

author = "Alison Powell and Huw Davies and Sandra Nutley",

note = "This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme (project number 11/2004/10).",

year = "2017",

month = may,

doi = "10.1332/174426416X14534671325644",

language = "English",

volume = "13",

pages = "201--223",

journal = "Evidence & Policy",

issn = "1744-2648",

publisher = "Policy Press",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Missing in action? The role of the knowledge mobilisation literature in developing knowledge mobilisation practices

AU - Powell, Alison

AU - Davies, Huw

AU - Nutley, Sandra

N1 - This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme (project number 11/2004/10).

PY - 2017/5

Y1 - 2017/5

N2 - Despite a burgeoning literature and the development of new theories about knowledge mobilisation in the past 15 years, findings from this online survey in 2014 of over 100 research agencies (n=106; response rate 57%) show the challenges of making effective use of formal and informal learning. Many agencies rely on traditional knowledge ‘push’ activities; formal use of theoretical models and frameworks is patchy; and knowledge-sharing between agencies and the comprehensive evaluation of knowledge mobilisation programmes are limited. Closer links between research agencies, and between these and knowledge mobilisation researchers, could enhance future knowledge mobilisation practice and theory.

AB - Despite a burgeoning literature and the development of new theories about knowledge mobilisation in the past 15 years, findings from this online survey in 2014 of over 100 research agencies (n=106; response rate 57%) show the challenges of making effective use of formal and informal learning. Many agencies rely on traditional knowledge ‘push’ activities; formal use of theoretical models and frameworks is patchy; and knowledge-sharing between agencies and the comprehensive evaluation of knowledge mobilisation programmes are limited. Closer links between research agencies, and between these and knowledge mobilisation researchers, could enhance future knowledge mobilisation practice and theory.

KW - Knowledge mobilisation

KW - Evidence-based policy

KW - Evidence-based practice

KW - Research intermediation

U2 - 10.1332/174426416X14534671325644

DO - 10.1332/174426416X14534671325644

M3 - Article

SN - 1744-2648

VL - 13

SP - 201

EP - 223

JO - Evidence & Policy

JF - Evidence & Policy

IS - 2

ER -

Missing in action? The role of the knowledge mobilisation literature in developing knowledge mobilisation practices

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this