From Research to Practice: A Knowledge Transfer Planning Guide

This 19-page guide published by the Institute for Work & Health (IWH) for individuals who want to disseminate research, shows how to get research into the hands of people who use it. The guide is organised around the five key questions of knowledge transfer, asking about: the message, the intended audience, the messenger, the transfer method, and the expected impact.



The central principle of the guide is the importance of relationships built on ongoing exchanges of information and ideas. Authors suggest that the audience may change, as individuals seek the information most useful to them; but, if researchers and decision makers already have existing relationships and established communication on research and the results of its application, the knowledge transfer is more likely to be successful.

There are four worksheets included in the guide that offer a step-by-step approach to determining the most productive way to transfer knowledge.

1. Creating messages: According to the authors, determining the message type
   can help with the decision of how best to communicate it. Message types are: data driven, expressing an actionable idea, or focused on provoking stakeholder discussion.
2. Understanding the audience: Determining those best positioned to use the
   research results is key, along with learning as much as possible about them and then bringing researchers and decision makers together. Choosing the right messenger is also recommended.
3. Transfer methods: Face-to-face transfer is known to be most effective. Methods include meeting with providers where they practice and organising education sessions. When that is not possible, the guide includes the following possibilities:
   
   • offering lectures and educational materials;
   • using reminder messages (for example, flagged notes on daily checklists or distance messaging via internet-based or intranet-based message transfer or via media dissemination) to
     prompt evidence-informed actions;
   • designing specific interventions
     to overcome identified barriers;
   • performing audits and
     providing feedback;
   • directing evidence to respected opinion
     leaders within a given discipline to influence the actions of
     others; and
   • encouraging patient intervention when it will
     improve performance.
4. Defining Impacts: Defining the expected impact helps determine not only the scope of a given plan but also the best approach to use. The guide asks practitioners to think about research impact in terms
   of how much the information exchange could:
   • change
     attitudes or awareness;
   • change policies or behaviours;
   • validate
     decisions already made

Electronic and media monitoring
are suggested as tools for assessing outcomes.