At KBHN's 2013 brain conference the KT Core made its debut with a workshop on KT and Social Media, co-led by Krista Jensen from York University's KMb Unit.

1. Introduction to Knowledge Translation
Anneliese Poetz, PhD – Manager, KT Core
Kids Brain Health Network
Saturday September 28, 2013

2. Presentation Overview
1. What is Knowledge Translation (KT)?
2. Common characteristics of various knowledge
translation models
3. Other considerations when doing KT
4. Relationship‐based Model for KT
5. KBHN KT Core Services

3. 1. What is Knowledge Translation?

4. Knowledge Translation (KT)
Otherwise known as:
‐ Knowledge Translation and Exchange (KTE)
‐ Knowledge Transfer Exchange and Exploitation
(KTEE)
‐ Knowledge Synthesis Transfer and Exchange
(KSTE)
‐ Knowledge Mobilization (KMb)

5. Knowledge Transfer vs. Knowledge Translation
Knowledge transfer: Embraced by the evidence‐based medicine
movement
One‐dimensional communication of knowledge
• The Push where researchers actively disseminate their research
• The Pull where the needs of knowledge users contribute to
moving knowledge into action
(improved outcome)
new knowledge
or evidence
Knowledge Translation

6. But in reality…
(improved outcome)
new knowledge
or evidence
environmental
legal
social
ethical
political
organizational

7. CIHR’s Definition of
Knowledge Translation
"... a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis,
dissemination, exchange and ethically‐sound application of
knowledge to improve the health of Canadians, provide more
effective health services and products and strengthen the health
care system.
This process takes place within a complex system of interactions
between researchers and knowledge users which may vary in
intensity, complexity and level of engagement depending on the
nature of the research and the findings as well as the needs of the
particular knowledge user."

8. CIHR KT Process: Dissemination
• Identifying the appropriate audience and tailoring the message
and medium to the audience
• Dissemination activities may include:
- Summaries for/briefings to stakeholders
- Educational sessions with patients, practitioners and/or
policy makers
- Engaging knowledge users in developing and executing
dissemination/implementation plan, tools creation, and
media engagement

9. CIHR KT Process: Exchange
• Collaborative problem‐solving
• Interaction between the knowledge user and the
researcher, resulting in mutual learning through the
process of planning, producing, dissemination, and
applying existing or new research in decision‐making

10. CIHR KT Process: Application
• Iterative process through which knowledge is put into practice
• Ethically‐sound application of knowledge needs to be consistent
with ethical principles and norms, social values, as well as legal
and regulatory frameworks
- Keep in mind: principles, values and laws can compete
among one another at any given point in time
• Evaluation and monitoring of KT initiatives, processes, and
activities are key components of the KT process.

11. CIHR’s Knowledge to Action Model

12. Two Types of KT at CIHR
1) End‐of‐grant KT
• The researcher develops and implements a plan for making
knowledge users aware of the knowledge that was gained during a
project.
• Typical dissemination and communication activities: KT to peers,
e.g. conference presentation and publications in peer‐reviewed
journals.
• More intensive dissemination activities: summary briefings to
stakeholders, interactive educational sessions with patients,
practitioners and/or policy makers, media engagement, or the use
of knowledge brokers.
• The commercialization of scientific discoveries is another form of
end of grant KT.

13. Two Types of KT at CIHR (Cont’d)
2) Integrated KT (IKT)
• Stakeholders or potential research knowledge users are engaged
to shape the research process.
- Determine the research questions
- Decide on the methodology
- Be involved in data collection and tools development
- Interpret the findings
- Help disseminate research results
• IKT = collaborative research, action‐oriented research, co‐
production of knowledge
• IKT should produce research findings that are more likely be
relevant to and used by the end users.

14. 2. Common Characteristics of
Knowledge Translation Models

15. • Inclusive conceptualization of knowledge
‐ Both research evidence and practical tacit knowledge should
be considered, and included where possible.
• Stakeholder engagement
‐ Where possible, through the entire process from knowledge
generation (research), synthesis, dissemination and exchange
• Interactions across jurisdiction or sectors
Common Characteristics
of KT models

16. Common Characteristics (cont’d)
• Communication (and also risk communication)
‐ Tailor your message and medium to the intended audience
(knowledge user)
• Context is VERY important!
‐ Be aware of the social, legal, environmental, ethical, political
and organizational factors that influences knowledge
utilization
‐ Important to engage stakeholders who know best!

17. 3. Other considerations when doing KT

18. • Knowledge produced varies greatly in terms of its readiness for
utilization.
‐ E.g. Knowledge emerged from basic research will likely require
further research before they can be considered for adoption and
application.
• There is often a disconnect between education institutions and
knowledge users in their attitude toward generation of knowledge.
- For most human activities, knowledge must be used before there
are economic and social returns. Whereas the act of generating
new knowledge in academic environments is deemed to be a
worthwhile cultural activity, even if the knowledge is not
immediately useful.
- Implications on messages to the audience
Other considerations for KT

19. 4. Relationship‐based model for KT

20. How high is the cliff?

21. Relationship building
Poetz,A. (2012). “Risk is a social thing, not just a mathematical thing:” a model for stakeholder
engagement in decision making. Risk, Hazards and Crisis in Public Policy. 3(2): Article 4

22. Perception of Risk
• “Perception is reality”
• Higher risk perception = higher potential for
conflict
• Lower level of understanding = higher risk
perception
• Poor quality relationship = lower trust
• Lower trust = higher risk perception

23. Potential for Conflict
• Poor/non‐effective communication = high
potential for conflict
• Collaboration = type of conflict mgmt
Types:
‐ Can be positive or negative
‐ Avoidance (withdraw from the relationship)
‐ Competition (my info is more ‘right’)

24. Communication
• Effective vs. ineffective
• Verbal vs. non‐verbal
• “listening” is also part of “communication”
• Source of information more important

25. Understanding
• Comes from effective communication
• Not to be confused with ‘knowledge’
• Misunderstanding = higher risk perception
• Misunderstanding = higher conflict potential

26. Relationship = bridge to KT
• Three key components:
– Trust
– Relationship commitment
– Communication
• KT measured as:
– Willingness of firms to share information with
other firms
Ramasamy, B, K.W. Goh, M.C.H. Yeung. (2006). Is Guanxi (relationship) a bridge to knowledge transfer? Journal of Business Research. 59: 130‐139.
“Guanxi is all about the cultivation of long‐term personal relationships.” p.132

27. Relationship = bridge to KT
trust = KT
communication = KT
Some interaction effects between trust, relationship
commitment, and communication on KT
Ramasamy, B, K.W. Goh, M.C.H. Yeung. (2006). Is Guanxi (relationship) a bridge to knowledge transfer? Journal of Business Research. 59: 130‐139.

28. KT occurs within a ‘system’
(improved outcome)
new knowledge
or evidence
environmental
legal
social
ethical
political
organizational

29. Using SM for KT…it’s all about the “E”
“…use social media to engage in a
conversation, not only to “pass down”
information.”
“…opportunity for health professionals to
explore, listen and engage.”
McNab, C. (2009). What social media offers to health professionals and citizens. Bull World Health Organ. 87: 566.

30. Limitations of SM
“…the establishment of a level of trust required
to facilitate the exchange of knowledge also
favours co‐presence and co‐location.”
“…technologically facilitated communication
cannot at present replace the direct face‐to‐
face contact that is often a prerequisite for the
successful transfer of tacit knowledge.”
Roberts, J. (2010). From know‐how to show‐how? Questioning the role of information and communication technologies in knowledge transfer. Technology
Analysis & Strategic Management. 12:4, 429‐443.

31. What SM can do for KBHN
• Expanding our reach:
– Dissemination
– Connecting with
practitioners/policymakers/community groups etc.
• Greater participation/engagement:
– Listening for gaps/needs
– Exchange/feedback

32. 5. KBHN KT Core Services

33. Knowledge Translation Services
“KT helps to maximize the impact of research
and training in neurodevelopmental disorders.”

34. Knowledge Translation Services
Knowledge Brokering:
• Collaborations: KBHNresearchers, partners
from the public, private, non‐profit and
practitioner sectors
• development of KBHN corporate
networks (CoBD)
• support KT planning

35. Knowledge Translation Services
Support for KT Events:
• event planning tools &
support to KBHN
researchers, trainees and
partners (including
decision‐makers)
• input and support to
KBHN events (e.g. annual
Brain Development
Conference)

36. Knowledge Translation Services
Support for KT Products:
• draft clear language research summaries
• support social media strategies
• assist KBHN researchers, students and
partner organizations with videos
and arts
based KT

37. Knowledge Translation Services
KT Capacity Building:
• KT training in person and online
• identify, assess and adapt KT tools to
KBHNneeds

38. Knowledge Translation Services
KT Evaluation Framework:
• develop evaluation framework for KT
• develop KT success stories

39. Training/Capacity Building
• Students and research staff to the full‐spectrum
of neurosciences research incl. ethics,
informatics, commercialization…
Expose
• them to establish and develop effective
research collaborations…Enable
• students and research staff with skills to
transfer research findings into tangible health,
social and economic benefits for Canadians
Equip

40. 5. Key Points
• Develop relationships & trust with those you
envision using your research
• Ongoing & effective communication
• Not just “push” of information, but “listening”
• Ask KT Core for advice/tools

41. www.kidsbrainhealth.ca
Anneliese Poetz, PhD
Manager – KT Core
apoetz@yorku.ca
416.736.2100 x44310