Knowledge Transfer and Exchange Plan - Essay Example

www.academia-research.com Sumanta Sanyal Knowledge Transfer and Exchange Plan Dated: October 29, 2005 Abstract This review treats ways and methods in which knowledge can be acquired and utilized by healthcare organizations in particular and others in general. It introduces that prospect by discussing knowledge and its relationship with an organization. It looks into the number of common processes by which knowledge generated by research can be transferred to an organization and the benefits that can accrue to an organization if such processes are efficiently controlled and managed. It touches at some length the strategies an organization should adopt to assure secure supply of knowledge through knowledge flow processes. It next looks into the Canadian healthcare situation by reviewing two premier Canadian healthcare institutions - Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. After looking at length at the measures these institutions have adopted to smoothen their own knowledge transfer processes it spells out the disadvantages of not having a competent knowledge transfer system in place in a healthcare organization as well as the benefits that can accrue if there is one. It lastly mentions some ways in which researchers and decision-makers can get together in tandem to enable fruitful generation of knowledge as well as determine ways in which such knowledge, after successful generation, can be efficiently disseminated among user groups for their maximum benefit. Introduction Knowledge is one of the most, probably the most, important asset of any organization. In this particular case the knowledge requirements of a health research foundation is being explored in relation to the possibilities of various processes in which the most useful knowledge can be acquired. The major process through which useful knowledge relevant to the organization can be acquired is by knowledge transfer and exchange. Dr. Tony Cuyler, the Chief Scientist of the Institute of Work and Health, Canada, has a very succinct and to-the-point definition of knowledge transfer. According to him knowledge transfer, put simply, is the transfer of research-based knowledge from the research community to the community of potential users. (Dr. Tony Cuyler, 2003, Institute of Work and Health). In this instance, the particular community of potential users is two groups - those who would benefit from the services of the healthcare organization and those who would provide those services. It is true that research findings are often published in erudite journals and other academic publications where knowledge transfer takes place among relevant professionals. This is also an important mode of knowledge transfer within the researcher community. So are academic conferences. What is sought for the healthcare organization is a mode of transfer whereby relevant knowledge utilizable by the foundation can be made easily available from the researcher community to the community of end-users who can directly benefit from it. An example is being cited to strengthen the point. A set of researchers has found a novel method of curing a certain common dysfunction of the heart and they publish their research findings in a peer-reviewed journal. Of course, a large number of professionals involved in cardiology read their paper and are advised of their new findings. This an important way of disseminating their exclusive knowledge and creating a knowledge base for potential usage but a more direct method of transfer would be if the foundation would get these researchers' consent to utilize that knowledge through the its good auspices for the benefit of its users. Professionals in the foundation would become well acquainted with the various aspects of the therapy and impart these to those who to come to the foundation to find succor from the common dysfunction the therapy cures. The common man or woman with the dysfunction cannot be expected to go through academic journals to find cures for their disease. They may not be knowledgeable enough to utilize such technical knowledge. Neither would the staff of the foundation if they were to acquire the knowledge on their own directly from the journal. Yet, if the researchers were made to get involved in the transfer it would be relatively much easier for the knowledge to get transferred to where it can be utilized directly by those who would be personally benefit from it. The other process inherent within knowledge transfer is knowledge exchange that is a legitimate extension of the successful transfer. In this case researchers design particular knowledge bases by procuring data directly from those who would be the potential users of that knowledge. To use the above example again, the set of researchers used their own initiative to find the cure to the dysfunction without any specific collection of field data from sufferers from the dysfunction. In the particular instance of knowledge exchange it may be that this set of researchers may conduct their research based on interaction with sufferers from the dysfunction - the potential users. This makes the research more user-specific in the following ways: The exact nature of the dysfunction can be determined by examining patients thus enabling researchers to pinpoint research topics within the broader ambit The research can be made more flexible to fit the variant needs of potential users so that the end results can be more comprehensively applicable Constant communication with potential users often clears many research dilemmas and makes it more capable of success Since the group of potential users also includes those health professionals who have a hand in applying the research findings to those who will directly benefit from it the applicability of the end results are also enhanced The ultimate results are more likely to satisfy both health professionals involved in application and potential users who suffer from the health problem (Dr. Tony Cuyler, 2003, Institute of Work and Health) This makes knowledge exchange a very important part of the broader knowledge transfer process. There is another mini-process with knowledge transfer that is also significant. That is knowledge sharing. This may be the sharing of the primary knowledge procured from researchers within the organization itself among various components or among different allied organizations, such as among different health organizations. Knowledge Flows This section looks into how knowledge may be made available for application wherever required through the combined processes of transfer, exchange and sharing. This is knowledge flow and it occurs between individuals, among groups of individuals and between and among professionals. To examine the nature and role of knowledge flow certain factors must be considered. These are as below: Characterizing the nature of knowledge flow Design of the information and communication systems that facilitate knowledge flow The technical problems and their solutions in development and implementation of systems that facilitate knowledge flow Managerial and organizational problems and their solutions in institutionalization and implementation of processes and activities that facilitate knowledge flow Intra- and interorganizational processes for effective leverage of knowledge through knowledge flow Behavioral study that reveals enablers and inhibitors of knowledge flow processes Effects of national, professional and organizational cultures on knowledge flow processes Knowledge flow behaviors within emergent communities like virtual ones The role of information and communication technologies in managing knowledge flow Knowledge reuse in organizations Organizational and economic incentive structures that facilitate knowledge flow Knowledge acquisition and transfer processes Knowledge transfer enablers Effects of organizational culture on knowledge transfer (Knowledge flows, Knowledge Management Systems Track) It may be noted here that all the factors set down above may not be germane to formulation of the plan under study but most of these factors saliently influence knowledge flow and should be considered at a later stage. The Canadian Context The study shall treat the objectives of knowledge transfer in the context of health for Canadians through a study of the transfer protocols of two premier Canadian health organizations - Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. Canadian Institutes of Health Research - Knowledge Translation Strategies The CIHS prefers to call knowledge transfer as knowledge translation and defines it as follows - "Knowledge translation is the exchange, synthesis and ethically-sound application of knowledge - within a complex system of interactions among researchers and users - to accelerate the capture of the benefits of research for Canadians through improved health, more effective services and products, and a strengthened health care system". It accounts for knowledge translation as a broad concept that encompasses all steps between the creation of new knowledge and its application for the overall benefit of society. The steps include knowledge dissemination, communication, technology transfer, ethical context, knowledge management, knowledge utilization, two-way communication between researchers and those who apply knowledge, implementation research, technology assessment, synthesis of results within the global context, development of consensus guidelines, and others (Knowledge Translation, Canadian Institute of Health Research, 2005). This is a very comprehensive listing of activities that may pertain to knowledge transfer and unveiling the implication behind each step within the overall transfer process will yield definitive strategies for the transfer process of other healthcare organizations' knowledge transfer plans. The CIHR itself implements knowledge translation strategies to achieve: Improved health for Canadians More effective services and products A strengthened Canadian health care system (CIHR Act, April 2000) CIHR knowledge translation activities are undertaken to implement the following strategies: Support KT (knowledge translation) research by funding grants and awards in open competition, both institutional and cross-institutional Contribute to building KT networks that may feed institutional needs on an ongoing basis by awarding long-term (five years) competitive grants and economic and knowledge-based collaborations Strengthen and Expand KT at CIHR by ensuring that KT potentials and opportunities within the organization are exploited to the maximum by making appropriate knowledge available for them Support and recognize KT potential externally through awards that encourage participants from outside the institution to compete (CIHR, Innovation in Action, Knowledge Translation Strategy, 2004-2009) Canadian Health Services Research Foundation - Knowledge Transfer Strategies The Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF) is another premier Canadian health institution that has achieved laudable success in motivating and initiating knowledge transfer between researchers and decision-makers to enable efficient health services capabilities in Canada. According to CHSRF documents knowledge transfer involves "linkage and exchange" - the interaction, collaboration and exchange of ideas between researchers and decision-makers to get the most effective results. These are promoted throughout the research process - the conception, investigation and dissemination of results. The foundation has undertaken a number of initiatives to promote knowledge transfer and exchange in health services research. These are as hereunder: They have a program called "Listening for Direction" which helps identify priority areas for research by consulting with decision-makers in healthcare to know what they think is most necessary The foundation's programs competition, newly-redesigned, called "Research, Exchange, and Impact for System Support" (REISS) links researchers and decision-makers as partners in research The foundation's "Mythbusters" series makes complex research findings available to the lay public in simple language The foundation funds "Research Syntheses" which is evaluation and dissemination of research findings for inclusion in policy and decision-making The foundation's "Capacity for Applied and Developmental Research and Evaluation" (CADRE) program aims at increasing capacity in applied health services and policy research The "Executive Training for Research Application" (EXTRA) program is a national training program that enables health services leaders to become even better managers by inducting evidence from research in their daily policy-making agenda The "Nursing Research Fund" allows facile development of research on nursing issues The foundation's "Templates and Approaches" program enables wider dissemination of knowledge through distribution of research findings in simple language The foundation claims to pioneer "Knowledge Brokering", which is facilitating transfer of knowledge among disparate groups (Knowledge Transfer and Exchange at Work, CHSRF, 2005) Benefits of Successful Knowledge Transfer As can be found after study of the knowledge transfer strategies of the two Canadian Health Service Institutions, research findings relevant to the healthcare sector are made available from the primary researchers to all levels of the healthcare organization, including the targeted communities who are the end-users. In some instances such knowledge is made available to the wider body of the world community as service to humankind, as in the case of the "Mythbusters" series of CHSRF. It is thus necessary to examine why these institutions with well-entrenched successful knowledge transfer mechanisms are so successful in achieving their service goals by studying the problems that may plague a healthcare institution from absence of a cogent knowledge transfer program. Lack of awareness of existing research Uneven distribution of knowledge causes variations in user abilities to access and utilize such knowledge (Variation in receptor capacity) Poor or scare research evidence on which to base decisions on Inadequate, irrelevant or incomplete evidence from research that may not be relevant to user needs or inappropriate for practical applications Inadequate incentives to both researchers and end-users for generation and utilization respectively of knowledge (Adapted from: Overview of Knowledge Translation, CIHR, 2005) On the other hand, in sharp contrast, an organization with a well-entrenched knowledge transfer protocol in place can accrue certain valuable advantages. Though the advantages of having an efficient transfer process has already been treated in the section on knowledge transfer at the onset of this review they are being re-emphasized here in the context of healthcare organizations to provide all necessary variegated coverage of this very important aspect. Highly accurate and appropriate research evidence that enables strategic health policy generation, policy application and effective user-friendliness Involved users who themselves help generate the research findings ensuring appropriateness and perfect user fit Cultural atmosphere in both research institutions and practitioners' establishments conducive to knowledge generation, dissemination and application Environments that are conducive to two-way exchange of knowledge that facilitates inter- and trans-disciplinary integration of expertise Effective knowledge transfer mechanisms like demonstration projects that allow the knowledge generated by research to all levels of relevance Established knowledge transfer network that enables fast and efficient knowledge flow from appropriate research findings to all levels of relevance Established mechanisms to initiate and nurture appropriate research to successful application stage (creativity) Established alignment of resources that enable sustained flow of knowledge to maintain both innovation, where required, and continuity (Adapted from: Overview of Knowledge Translation, CIHR, 2005) Both the disadvantages of not having in place a cogent knowledge transfer system and the benefits of having one in place may help organizations, specifically healthcare related ones in context of this study, realize that it is imperative that such a system be put in place so that knowledge-based resources can be utilized to the maximum. In this particular instance knowledge-based resources may be taken to mean research findings that can be utilized to educate the general public and alleviate the sufferings of affected persons, the primary functions of healthcare organizations that are targeted by this study. Interaction between Decision-makers and Researchers Decision-makers do not normally utilize research information on all policies they make. Nevertheless if the research information is presented in a clear and concise way it becomes more probable for decision-makers to become attracted to the information. Thus, it is necessary that decision-makers and researchers collaborate closely at all times right from the initiation of the research for the research information to be relevant in both form and content to the decision-makers (Denise Kouri, HEALNet Regionalization Research Center, December, 1999). It is also true that the research culture of researchers and the management culture of decision-makers are somewhat variant from each other. At times, this difference becomes too competitive for comfort and effect. Both sides vie to get the most out of the other. While, on the face of it, this may seem conducive to excellence it must nevertheless be noted that some amount of give-and-take is necessary between both sides for the success of the project. There is a widespread presumption that decision-makers buy research findings for policy making and there may be a hard-sell attitude among researchers looking to exploit this. On the other hand, decision-makers often restrict researchers to only those topics that are marketable. To avoid both complicacies it is to improve understanding of the limits and potentials of the interactive ambience so that an environment for research can be created wherein the needs of both groups are satisfied. Developing a successful bridging strategy in itself requires great expertise and the assistance of a knowledge broker may be required. Such a strategy in itself may allow knowledge transfer from research to decision-making more than a simple production/supply situation (Denise Kouri, HEALNet Regionalization Research Center, December, 1999). Certain recommendations for healthcare organizations looking for successful strategies for knowledge transfer are: Identify the conditions under which the collaboration will be useful and choose the collaboration carefully: Collaboration between researchers and decision-makers should be planned carefully. The acknowledged advantages of collaboration are a pooling of resources and the buy-in factor of all participants. On the other hand, sometimes it is not beneficial to collaborate where no appreciable benefits accrue or where the costs outweigh the benefits. In such cases it is better to strategize a one-way pathway from research to decision so that cynicism on the collaboration process does not develop among the incumbents. Build bridging expertise so that both researchers and decision-makers are effectively sourced with mutual co-operation: It is necessary to develop skilled behavior for successful participation. One of primary skills is mutual respect and an anticipation and expectation of participation by both sides. Another such behavioral strategy is developing trust and co-operative feelings where each side belongs. Such a feeling can be inculcated by incorporating decision-makers early in the research process and discussing with them tough problems and issues that may come up in research. This participation by both sides at all levels and on all significant issues allows sharing of both problems and consequences and thus creates a sense of belonging. Anticipate and plan for ambiguity and complexity that may be introduced by collaboration: When it has been decided that collaboration is necessary it is necessary to plan and budget for required efforts. It is necessary to get a long-term plan in place for continued participation and sustained joint effort. It must be expected that negotiations are inherent in the participation process and sustained commitment of all parties must be gainsaid before commencement of the collaboration. A clear spell out of the goals and expectations of both researchers and decision-makers must be discussed and mutually agreed upon to minimize unlooked-for problems later on in the process. Create several participation models for decision-makers so that they can commit themselves at different levels as resources and interests allow: Possibly some decision-makers may actually be involved in the actual research process and it is necessary for these to be included in think-tanks and planning groups within the ambit of researchers. These may be termed as co-researchers and they should be allowed longer-term commitment and deeper engagement with the subject matter. Other decision-makers, the majority, are service-oriented and may be more distanced from research than the former group. These differences within the decision-making group should be discussed and clarified at the very onset of collaboration so that allocation of responsibility is clearly delineated. Enable university researchers to enter into the collaboration process by counteracting disincentives they may face in the interaction process: Just as it is necessary to provide for special features within the collaboration process for facile participation of decision-makers it is also necessary for provision of facilitating features that allow researchers from the higher echelons of academia to enter into the collaboration process without feeling constrained. The research program should be balanced between expectations of precision and specificity and research objectives that promote relevance and usefulness: Prevalent views may advocate that the best science is limited to experimentations under controlled circumstances. This may be a serious drawback and inbuilt provisions within the research program for explorations into other innovative but effective methods that allow the research team - researchers and decision-makers - to analyze, infer and deliberate from real-world activities and intervening situations as they unfold may be the most logical path for the research proceedings to be conducted along (Denise Kouri, HEALNet Regionalization Research Center, December, 1999). These above bulleted points would serve well for organizations, specifically healthcare related ones, in the acquisition stage of knowledge transfer. The next stage, one as important as acquiring the right knowledge, is disseminating the knowledge once it is in to the target audience. Disseminating Research A rough dissemination plan may be put in place at the onset of research by the combined efforts of the researchers and decision-makers and this plan evolves as the research progresses until, when the research is complete and the findings are in place with the institution, the combined team finalizes the plan to extract implications of the research for decision-makers and the target audience and develop key messages that are both simple and comprehensively informative. The following points may help in formulating a dissemination plan: Target audiences should be identified early in the knowledge transfer process and they should be given a sense of belonging so that their interests are sustained. The key messages should be made simple and clear, action-oriented and customized for each type of target audience. In developing key messages it should be noted that the implications drawn by the combined team for themselves may not be suitable for the target audience for whom the research may implicate other benefits. Such target benefits should be highlighted and made manifest and possible through the key messages. Messengers and sources of messages should be determined on the basis of their influence with the target audience. Such messengers or sources may be people or organizations. Dissemination procedures have to be determined on the basis of preference of particular target audiences. Some may prefer face-to-face meetings while others may want written reports (Disseminating Research, CHSRF Website, 2005) Conclusion Knowledge is probably the most valuable asset, as stated at the onset of this review, an organization, whether profit-generating or voluntary, can possess and the processes by which it is acquired and utilized are, by association, some of the most important functions of the organizations. Thus, knowledge transfer processes, specifically in the instance of healthcare organizations here, have to be put firmly in place for the overall success in achieving the aims and goals of the organizations. Such processes must be both continuous and current, that is, they must be capable of being both flexible to exploit current changes and stable to lend longevity to the organization's long-term plans. The review ends with the note that the methods defined in it are capable of administering just such flexibility and continuity to knowledge transfer processes an organization may want to adopt through their implementation. List of References Denise Kouri, Bridging the gaps: Improving interaction between researchers and decision makers, 1999, HealthNet Regionalization Research Center. Extracted on 22nd October, 2005, from: http://www.regionalization.org/Publications/OP3.pdf#search='Denise%20Kouri%20Bridging%20the%20gaps' Disseminating Research, CHSRF Website. Extracted on 22nd October, 2005, from: http://www.chsrf.ca/knowledge_transfer/pdf/dissemination_plan_e.pdf Dr. Tony Cuyler, Knowledge Transfer and Exchange, Institute of Work and Health Website, 2005. Extracted on 18th October, 2005, from: http://www.iwh.on.ca/kte/kte.php Innovation in Action, Knowledge Translation Strategy, 2004-2009, CIHR. Extracted on 22nd October, 2005, from: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/documents/kt_strategy_2004-2009_e.pdf Knowledge Management Systems Track. Extracted on 18th October, 2005, from: http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/HICSS39/fkmscfp.htm#top Knowledge transfer and exchange at work, CHSRF Website. Extracted on 22nd October, 2005, from: http://www.chsrf.ca/knowledge_transfer/work_e.php Knowledge Translation, Modified 2005, CIHR Website. Extracted on 22nd October, 2005, from: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/8505.html#clfHeader Overview of Knowledge Translation, Reviewed 2004, CIHR Website. Extracted on 22nd October, 2005, from: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/22845.html Read More