Knowledge exchange and knowledge brokering: A model

Ward, V., Smith, S., Carruthers, S., Hamer, S., & House, A. (2010). Knowledge Brokering: Exploring the process of transferring knowledge into action. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds.

Description

This knowledge exchange model describes the dynamic and social knowledge exchange process which occurs amongst health service delivery teams. The model has been used to develop two practical frameworks to help practitioners and researchers integrate knowledge exchange into their everyday tasks. Based on observations gained by a knowledge broker working in a mental health organization, the model provides key considerations for five domains in knowledge exchange.

Problem
Context
Knowledge
Intervention
Use

This model demonstrates that knowledge exchange is a complex, dynamic and iterative process, and recommends that organizations address activities within these domains in a reflexive rather than linear or cyclical manner.

The authors have also drawn some insights about the roles and characteristics of knowledge brokers (Ward et al., 2009):

functioning as intermediaries between research and practice;
sharing tacit knowledge that resides within individuals and organizations, in addition to research evidence; and
building capacity amongst practitioners and decision-makers in understanding and using research.

Steps for Using Method/Tool

Based on a literature review and a knowledge brokering intervention implemented in a mental health organization, the authors identified these domains as part of knowledge exchange:

Identify and communicate about the problem that needs to be addressed.
Analyze the context that surrounds knowledge producers and users.
Develop, identify and choose knowledge which is relevant to the problem.
Select specific knowledge exchange activities (interventions).
Consider how knowledge will be used in practice.

Tables on pg. 12–14 illustrate some activities associated with these five domains.

Frameworks for research users (pg. 24) and research producers (pg. 25–26) operationalize these five domains.

These summaries are written by the NCCMT to condense and to provide an overview of the resources listed in the Registry of Methods and Tools and to give suggestions for their use in a public health context. For more information on individual methods and tools included in the review, please consult the authors/developers of the original resources.

We have provided the resources and links as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by McMaster University of any of the products, services or opinions of the external organizations, nor have the external organizations endorsed their resources and links as provided by McMaster University. McMaster University bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external sites.