Enabling Knowledge Brokerage Intermediaries to Be Evidence-Informed

Autor/inn/en	Gough, David; Maidment, Chris; Sharples, Jonathan
Titel	Enabling Knowledge Brokerage Intermediaries to Be Evidence-Informed
Quelle	In: Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 18 (2022) 4, S.746-760 (15 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1744-2648
Schlagwörter	Knowledge Management; Facilitators (Individuals); Evidence Based Practice; Decision Making; Needs Assessment; Standards + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Wissensmanagement; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Bedarfsermittlung; Standard
Abstract	Target audience: What Works Centres; other intermediary brokerage agencies; their funders and users; and researchers of research use. Background: Knowledge brokerage and knowledge mobilisation (KM) are generic terms used to describe activities to enable the use of research evidence to inform policy, practice and individual decision making. Knowledge brokerage intermediary (KBI) initiatives facilitate such use of research evidence. This debate paper argues that although the work of KBIs is to enable evidence-informed decision making (EIDM), they may not always be overt and consistent in how they follow the principles of EIDM in their own practice. Key points for discussion: Drawing on examples from existing brokerage initiatives, four areas are suggested where KBIs could be more evidence-informed in their work: (1) needs analysis: evidence-informed in their analysis of where and how the KBI can best contribute to the existing evidence ecosystem; (2) methods and theories of change: evidence-informed in the methods that the KBI uses to achieve its goals; (3) evidence standards: credible standards for making evidence claims; and (4) evaluation and monitoring: evidence-informed evaluation of their own activities and contribution to the knowledge base on evidence use. For each of these areas, questions are suggested for considering the extent that the principles are being followed in practice. Conclusions and implications: KBIs work with evidence but they may not always be evidence-informed in their practice. KBIs could benefit from more overtly attending to the extent that they apply the logic of EIDM to how they work. In doing so, KBIs can advance both the study, and practice, of using research evidence to inform decision making. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Policy Press, an imprint of Bristol University Press. University of Bristol, 1-9 Old Park Hill, Bristol BS2 8BB, UK. Tel: +44-117-954-5940; e-mail: pp-info@policypress.co.uk; Web site: https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/journals/evidence-and-policy
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01