Creating a new articulation between research and practice through policy? The views and experiences of researchers and practitioners

Abstract

Objectives

In 1990, the Quebec Social Research Council - a body financing social research in Quebec, Canada -launched a new policy encouraging the development of social research units within health care organizations. Through financial incentives, it encouraged the implementation of long-term collaborations between researchers and practitioners with the purpose of transforming both scientific knowledge production and professional practices. This paper examines the perceptions of researchers and practitioners regarding the attributes and the usefulness of this collaborative research policy.

Methods

A self-administered survey was sent to all the researchers (n = 146; response rate 78.1%) and practitioners (n = 204; response rate 44.1%) involved in the 21 collaborative research teams funded in 1998. T-tests were performed in order to assess the difference between the perceptions of researchers and practitioners in five key dimensions of collaborative research.

Results

The results showed that, contrary to expectations, researchers and practitioners shared fairly similar views regarding the various dimensions of collaborative research. They both agreed that their involvement within collaborative research teams had contributed to the development of new skills and practices but had not facilitated their participation in external activities nor their involvement in networks and organizations that influence environments in which public policies and practices are deployed. They also both encountered some difficulties in putting the dimensions that they highly valued into practice.

Conclusions

Collaborative research within health care organizations succeeded in fostering the implementation of new modes of knowledge production and intervention. Nevertheless, special attention needs to be given to the development of strategies to reduce the discrepancies between values and practices.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Kaplan

, Levine

. The politics of research. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1997

Charue-Duboc

. Introduction. Dans des savoirs en action: contributions de la recherche en gestion. Paris: Éditions l'Harmattan; 1995: 11–24

Cohen

, Levinthal

. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 1990; 35: 128–152

Harchuel

. Apprentissages collectifs et activités de conception. Revue Française de Gestion 1994; 99: 109–120

Latour

. La science en action. Paris: Éditions la Découverte, 1989

Huberman

. Predicting conceptual effects in research utilisation: looking with both eyes. Knowledge in Society 1989; 2(3): 6–24

Yin

, Moore

. Lessons on the utilisation of research from nine case experiences in the natural hazards field. Knowledge and Society 1988; 1(3): 25–44

, Rich

. Explaining use of information in public policymaking. Knowledge and Policy 1996; 9: 3–35

Kearns

. Innovations in local government: a socio-cognitive network approach. Knowledge and Policy 1992; 5(2): 45–67

10.

Snow

. The two cultures and a second look: an expanded version of the two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969

11.

Argyris

. Knowledge for action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1993

12.

Bickel

, Hattrup

. A case study of institutional collaboration to enhance knowledge use: restructuring practitioner-researcher dialogue in education. Knowledge and Policy 1991; 4(4): 56–78

13.

Bohman

. Public deliberation. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1996

14.

Guba EG, Lincoln YS.Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1989

15.

Reason

. Three approaches to participative inquiry. In: Denzin

, Lincoln

Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 1994: 324–339