Reflections on “Commitment Issues: Part 2”
The Researcher Perspective on the Key Principles of Integrated Knowledge Translation
In the previous post, we highlighted Part I of a blog series from the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR),which touched on common pitfalls and tips for doing integrated KT (iKT) in research from the end-user perspective. Today, we highlight the researcher perspective (Dr. Heather Gainforth, University of British Columbia) with reflections on Part II of this series.
The Researcher Perspective: Key Principles for iKT
Like research end-users, researchers also face several ‘commitment issues’ with regards to doing iKT (including time, skills, and knowledge needed to foster long-term and meaningful relationships) that might make them question whether or not it’s really worth it. As a researcher with a track record for collaborative research, Dr. Heather Gainforth puts forth answers to questions she’s asked often, including: (1) how do I do iKT?, and (2) is it really worth it? (spoiler alert — the answer is yes!)
Start Early & Have an Open Mind
As described in last week’s post, researchers often approach their end-users too late in the game when the research is already set in motion. In iKT research, it’s essential to build relationships and develop equal partnerships. Through this kind of collaboration, work to co-develop a research question and program that is valuable, relevant, and usable for the end-user organization. Approach your end-users early (before the grant writing stage) and start with the question “how can I help?”
Value All Expertise
It’s critical to recognize your end-users opinions, values and expertise are equally important to your own. In academia, researchers are often thought to be the experts, but expertise and knowledge comes in many forms — data isn’t just numbers. By recognizing the value of all expertise and valuing your end-users insights, you’ll end up with a richer and more meaningful end product. This means ensuring that everyone on the team is recognized, has ownership and authorship of the research, and that they are fairly compensated for their time and effort. Additionally, offering your expertise to the end-user organization (even if it’s not directly related to the research study) strengthens the partnership and your understanding of their needs and values. For example, Dr. Gainforth has given talks, analyzed data, evaluated programs, and contributed in a number of ways to Spinal Cord Injury BC. Finally, it’s important to remember that equal partnerships doesn’t always mean equal contribution to all tasks — discuss this at the outset to determine roles, responsibilities, and expectations of everyone on the team (i.e. who wants to be involved and at what level).
Have the Interests of Your Community Partners at Heart
By respecting the interests of your end-users and by being genuinely compassionate about what they do, and of their lived experiences, you ensure that you only embark in partnerships that are of benefit to all those involved.
Foster Long-Term Relationships
Dr. Gainforth views her partnerships as the foundation of her research program and as such, fosters partnerships that last far beyond the grant cycle. In academia and in most aspects of employment, we have colleagues that we partner with throughout the course of our entire career. In iKT research, your end-users also become your colleagues and lifelong collaborators — if you take the time to develop meaningful and lasting relationships from the get-go.
Whoa! That’s a lot of work. Is it worth it?
Dr. Gainforth contests that yes, it is… 100% of the time.
But that’s not to say it isn’t time consuming, particularly in the initial stages of establishing a partnership. However, once relationships are established, the benefits far outweigh the costs, if you are mindful of the key principles above. The benefits to your research include faster recruitment (and increased retention — see Rishma’s blog for a real-world example), unique interpretations and insights during data analysis that may not have been identified without end-user involvement (see Brandy’s blog), key networks and methods for dissemination of findings, and most importantly — relevant and impactful research that is valuable and meaningful to end-users, and society (which really is what research is all about!).
What are your thoughts on the different perspectives in iKT? Let us know in the comments or on Twitter @KnowledgeNudge.
About the Author
Leah Crockett is a doctoral student in the Department of Community Health Sciences at the University of Manitoba.
