1. Mapping the Three Worlds of Knowledge Transfer By Réjean Landry, Nabil Amara and Mathieu Ouimet Prepared for Presentation at KU02: Colloquium on Knowledge Utilization and Transfer: Issues for the Individual, organization and Policy, St. Catherine’s College, Oxford, July 01-03, 2002

2. Acknowledgement We want to acknowledge the financial support of the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for our projects on knowledge transfer and the participation of our students at this colloquium

3. Purpose To provide a metatheoretical framework for understanding the transformations that link individual behavior to organizations and public policy in the real world of knowledge transfer

4. A Metatheoretical Framework that is… Micro because it starts from the individual as the basic unit of analysis to explain knowledge transfer Meso because major explanatory variables include organizational incentives explaining the actions of individuals in knowledge transfer Macro because choices of individuals and incentives created by organizations are influenced by the incentives provided by public policies regarding knowledge transfer

5. The Five Working Parts of the Metatheory The researcher The user of research The knowledge exchanged between researchers and users The coordinating rules of organizations The incentives provided by public policies

6. The Micro Level The micro level lays the stress on the individual as the basic unit of analysis Knowledge transfer is explained by individual factors Dominant approach: the science push Focus: on supply of research evidence by researchers Variations: different theories assume variations in ways individuals respond to incentives

7. The Micro Level Specified Focus of research: on advancement of scholarly knowledge Researchers: are the sources of ideas for directing research Assumption about research results: provide solutions for concrete problems Assumption about users: able to identify and translate research results in new or improved products or services ( high receptive capacity)

8. Explanatory Variables at the Micro level Number of publications, patents, … Disciplines and specialties –some are more pertinent… Level of funding Policies (incentives) regarding funding of research

9. The Meso Level Knowledge transfer is explained by organizational factors Dominant approach: the organizational interests model Focus: on short term needs and expectations of professionals and managers located in organizations Emerging approach: the «organization as a milieu or as a community of practice » Variations: many other approaches on the market of approaches…

10. The Meso Level Specified Focus of research : on short term needs and context of users of research Users: are the sources of ideas for directing research Assumption about research results: provide solutions for concrete problems Assumption about users: able to identify and translate research results in new or improved products or services ( high receptive capacity)

11. Explanatory Variables of the Organizational Interests Approach Policy areas– science-based or not-- Convergence between interests of organizations and research results Hiearchical level of users Size of organizations Age of organizations

12. Explanatory Variables of the Organization as a Milieu Level of interactions between individuals Level of collective learning (research in partnership, customized training, …) Hypothesis: some milieux are more favorable for knowledge exchange than others

13. Four Innovative Milieux

14. The Macro Level Knowledge transfer is explained primarily by policy factors Issue: to provide incentives to induce individuals to do things they would not do otherwise Focus: on provision of incentives either to researchers or to users of research

15. Linkages across levels

16. Micro to Meso Informal Linkages Informal interactions between reseachers and users in organizations Refer to face to face interactions, relational capital, social networks, social capital, trust… Enhance ability to identify and develop opportunities of utilization of knowledge

17. Micro to Meso Formal Linkages Formal Linkages between researchers and users: provide opportunities for exchange… Examples: –…Participation in professional conferences and workshops involving researchers and users –…Membership on expert-panels, and committees involving researchers and users, –…Newsletters –…Research reports sent by e-mail –…Research evidence available on the Internet –…Research evidence discussed by professional associations, and other venues

18. Micro to Meso Knowledge Brokers Knowledge brokers: are intermediaries between researchers and users Intermediaries: individuals or organizations Assumptions: brokers understand the tacit dimension of research (assumptions, extent of applicability, required skills, etc.) and the tacit dimensions of problems to be solved by users…

19. Meso to Meso Students Graduates move from universities to organizations that use research Knowledge is embodied in highly qualified people Knowledge embodied in students is translated in new or improved products or services, thus increasing the receptive capacity and the absorptive capacity of users of external knowledge

20. Meso to Meso Job Mobility Highly qualified workers move from organizations to organizations Knowledge embodied in highly qualified people circulates through job mobility Knowledge embodied in HQP is translated in new or improved products or services, thus increasing the receptive capacity of users of external knowledge

21. Meso to Meso Equipment Equipment is produced by one organization and used by another Codified knowledge is embodied in advanced technologies Use of advanced technologies increases the transfer of codified knowledge Use of advanced technologies translates in new or improved products or services

22. Micro to Meso Virtual Linkages Focus is on the electronic infrastructure, on information systems Shortcoming: not appropriate for exchange of tacit knowledge

23. Micro to Meso through Macro Formal Research Alliances Refer to formal partnerships and collaboration between researchers and users These alliances are the results of public policies inducing research and users to forge alliances Examples of organizations fostering such alliances:  Canadian Health Services Researh Foundation  Canadian Foundation for Innovation

24. Putting the Working Parts Together Researchers act to achieve valued outcomes regarding knowledge transfer Decision makers choose to use research suitable for their decision situations

25. The Working Part of the Knowledge Transfer Framework Attributes of organizations Attributes of public policies Attributes of researchers Attributes of researchers Use of research Innovation in services

26. The Decision Making Situations The attributes of the decision making situations in health services organizations involve: A large number of decision makers Many procedural rules constraining choices and uptake of research Limited resources constraining choices and uptake of research

27. The Attributes of the Knowledge Exchanged between Researchers and Users Codified or tacit? Reports of single research projects or syntheses? Technical knowledge or knowledge translated into non technical language? Customized or non customized knowledge?

28. Exchange of Protected Intellectual Property patents copyright for computer software or databases copyright for educational material integrated circuit topographies industrial designs trademarks plant breeders’ rights Other (please specify)

29. Exchange of Unprotected Intellectual Property Knowledge to improve decisions made by decision-makers, professionals, patients Knowledge corresponding to general principles, not usable products Knowledge feeding the decision-making process at different stages: problem identification, formulation of alternatives, selection of one alternative, etc. Knowledge not providing definitive results or specific recommendations for actions…

30. Incentives Provided to Researchers for Knowledge Transfer To what extent are activities of knowledge transfer undertaken by researchers : –Documented in reports and CV? –Recognized at the meso (universities) and macro (granting councils) levels? –Rewarded at the meso and macro levels? Is the extent of documentation, recognition and rewards sufficient to represent suitable incentives to foster knowledge transfer?

31. Incentives Provided to Users of Knowledge To what extent are activities of knowledge uptake undertaken by users : –Documented in reports and CV? –Recognized at the meso (organizations) and macro (public policies) levels? –Rewarded at the meso and macro levels? Is the extent of documentation, recognition and rewards sufficient to represent suitable incentives to foster knowledge uptake?

32. Aggregated Results Given the icentives provided to researchers and users, their decision making situations and the attributes of the knowledge exchanged, one should predict no transfer or very low transfer of research in health services organizations

33. However Activities regarding knowledge transfer are underdocumented, underrecognized and under rewarded Therefore, we do more than we know in knowledge transfer

34. Conclusion Knowledge transfer involves a complex process Need to create incentives for better reporting and better recognition for activities regarding knowledge transfer Need more theoretical and empirical investigations to shed light on new dimensions of knowledge transfer

35. Thank you for your attention More on knowledge transfer at http://kuuc.chair.ulaval.ca