Collaborating for Social Good / Collaborer pour le bien collectif

David Phipps, RIR-York

What happens when 88 people get together to talk social innovation? You get the start of a Regional and systems level response to address persistent social challenges. You also get to dance!

Que se passe-t-il lorsque 88 personnes se rassemblent pour discuter d’innovation sociale? Vous obtenez l’émergence d’une réponse à des défis sociaux persistants, et ce, à l’échelle régionale et systémique.

Collaborating for Social Good was sponsored by the conference series “Business Innovation in Changing Times” a capacity building series for York Region designed to accelerate innovation and business growth. On April 18, delegates from the private, public and non-profit sectors came together to discuss how to collaborate to create social benefits. There were 29 delegates from the non-profit sector, 35 from business, 11 from education and 13 from government. York’s Knowledge Mobilization Unit was pleased to be part of the steering committee. We also were an exhibitor and presented on a panel with Women’s Centre of York Region and ventureLAB.

Much of the day was spent mind mapping to identify drivers, issues (“burrs”) and opportunities. Maps were developed and shared and commented upon. In the end the maps were synthesized into opportunities/challenges for York Region. A group of 25 participants came together on May 13 to continue the dialogue. These 25 were comprised of 10 from business, 6 from government, 3 from education and 6 from the nonprofit sector. This group came together to begin to address the two social innovation priorities derived from the mind map synthesis: 1) knowledge transfer; and, 2) taking risks.

Mind maps

Three things were striking from this event:

1. There were more private sector than non-profit sector participants: often the non-profit sector dominates the discourse of social innovation. This has been true at York’s Knowledge Mobilization Forums and at many of the knowledge mobilization events we have held in York Region. Collaborating for Social Good seems to be the start of a new conversation where business has an equal voice.
2. This was a Region wide conversation: there was no dominant sector or municipality.
3. Knowledge transfer – sharing across sectors – was identified as a priority for the Region.

Huge shout outs to Kirsten Eastwood (Women’s Centre of York Region) and the York Region Social Innovation Collaboration for their time and talents in organizing and executing this wonderful event.

We also embedded some arts based activities. Two poets from York University attended and interpreted the day in poetry. Sara-Jane Gloutnez composed “Cubism” and she collaborated with Christian Quaresma on an “Untitled” poem. These poems capture some of the thoughts and themes of the day in a style that is both foreign and familiar at the same time.

And thanks to Seneca College we danced. Seneca sent three students who led us in some Zumba and Latin dance. This was an amazingly successful activity. You have to trust each other when dancing. You also need trust for a successful collaboration.

Dance may just be a novel vehicle for knowledge mobilization!

Dancing for collaboration

Social Media for Research / Les médias sociaux pour la recherche

David Phipps, RIR-York

Can you use social media in your research? Yes! Can you build capacity among research administrators to help researchers use social media in you research? Yes, and Krista Jensen (@atomickitty) shows you how.

Pouvez-vous utiliser les médias sociaux dans vos recherches? Oui! Pouvez-vous développer les compétences des administrateurs de la recherche afin d’aider les chercheurs à employer les médias sociaux dans leurs recherches? Oui, et Krista Jensen (@atomickitty) vous montre comment cela peut être fait.

York’s Knowledge Mobilization Unit has been actively building capacity for social media as a tool for research dissemination and engagement. In 2012, we published a book chapter that presented some social media tools and how they can be used in research and knowledge mobilization. Last year we also provided a variety of social media workshops including on overview of social media, a 2.5 hour twitter for learning and research workshop, a wordpress workshop as well as a workshop on building a social media strategy.

Krista Jensen (@atomickitty)

This year we were invited by the organizers of the annual Canadian Association of University Research Administrators (CAURA) to host a workshop on social media. The audience was research administrators but the objective was supporting social media strategies for research projects (even though we frequently delved into social media as a tool to support the research services office). Increasingly granting agencies are demanding knowledge mobilization or knowledge translation strategies for grant applications. In February 2012, we gave a knowledge mobilization webinar for CAURA. Increasingly these knowledge mobilization strategies involve social media. Hence the CAURA workshop this year.

We had 13 people show up, which was ideal. There was some hands on group work that would not have been feasible with a larger group. The presentation is available below or here on the KMbYork Slide Share account.

Some of the issues raised by the group included:

• Resourcing – who does this and how do you pay for it?> Make it someone’s job and ensure research grant budgets have line items for social media including for purchasing pro accounts (an eligible expense on many granting programs)
• Risks – do you need policies to manage risk created by social media?> Social media is just another channel… have policies to manage risk and ensure that social media use is anticipated in those policies
• Role of corporate communications?> A great ally so long as they serve for more than brand stewardship
• Volume – how to manage the volume when you already can’t get through all your e mail?> See resourcing and make it someone’s job for the research office or the research program.

The audience was very engaged. Krista Jensen put the session together and presented 95% of it. The audience appreciated her experience and wisdom. Everyone came back after break (in fact, we picked up one person!). Email and blackberries were almost wholly absent from the session (always a good sign) and evaluations were more than positive. Respondents were asked 5 questions with a maximum score of 5. We received 10 evaluations for a total possible score of 250. Krista received a score of 243/250, a score of 97.2%. And when asked who was thinking differently after the session every hand went up. When asked who will be acting differently after the session about 80% of the hands stayed up.

Thanks Krista for the excellent workshop. And thanks to Gary Myers (@kmbeing) who came along as a social media and knowledge mobilization expert to lend his experience to the discussion.

York, Harvard and Oxford Universities Talk Social Innovation

The following was originally posted on YFile on March 25, 2013. It is reposted here with permission.

Representatives from York University, Harvard University and the University of Oxford met on March 4 and 5 in London, England, to articulate their shared vision regarding the role of higher education institutions in supporting social innovation and social enterprise.

David Phipps (left), executive director of research & innovation services, and chief knowledge mobilizer at York University; Daniela Papi, program design and outreach manager at the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at Oxford University; Meghan O. Mahoney, assistant director of Social and Cultural Entrepreneurship at the Harvard Innovation Lab; and Jennifer Casasanto, director of external programs for Harvard University’s School of Engineering & Applied Sciences, took part in the meetings. The group explored their different models of institutional support for social innovation.

Hosted by the Canadian High Commission in London, England, they were joined by representatives from the British High Commission, the McConnell Family Foundation (Canada), Social Innovation Generation (Canada), and the Young Foundation and the Economic & Social Research Council, both based in the U.K.

Universities play an integral role in the intellectual, cultural, and economic development of their surrounding regions. In addition to producing new knowledge and talented graduates, universities contribute to innovation, productivity and prosperity through technology transfer and commercialization. However, the role of the university in the growing areas of social innovation and social entrepreneurship is still emerging.

“Some faculty members and students have been active in helping find solutions to pressing social and environmental challenges; however, universities are not making the most of this potential. Universities need to become more effective and act systematically to maximize the impact of their research and teaching,” said Will Norman, director of research at the Young Foundation.

To date, York, Harvard, and Oxford have developed slightly varying approaches to the task.

Under the leadership of Robert Haché, vice-president research and innovation, the Office of Research Services at York University provides services that support the development of social innovations arising from the research of faculty and students who work in collaboration with partners from the public and non-profit sectors. “It is important that universities play a role in social innovation as we do in harnessing innovation in science and technology,” Haché said. “The discussions started by York and our colleagues at Harvard and Oxford will help to develop an international consensus on the roles of universities in leading and supporting initiatives in social innovation.”

The Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, located within the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, focuses on mainstreaming entrepreneurial approaches for social change throughout the School and the University through teaching, research and practice. “While we award full scholarships to accomplished social entrepreneurs seeking to complete a one-year MBA,” notes Pamela Hartigan, executive director of the Skoll Centre, “we recognize that most students will not be entrepreneurs. Yet they can be ‘entrepreneuring’ wherever their careers take them. Our goal is to give them the exposure, the tools and the confidence to contribute their talents to improving the state of the world.”

Harvard University is also committed to social innovation. In one of the University’s centers of activity, the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS), students are educated in the process of “design thinking” and problem solving within complex systems. Harvard’s undergraduate engineering degrees build on a strong foundation in the liberal arts so that graduates bring a uniquely humanistic approach to design thinking for social innovation. An important partner for Harvard SEAS is the Harvard Innovation Lab, a university-wide interdisciplinary resource center for advising, mentoring and incubation of ideas.

“Our mission is to instill in our students the desire to seek out solutions and mitigations to complex global, economic, and environmental challenges,” says Fawwaz Habbal, executive dean of the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. “Through our strong commitment to building students’ core technical competence, as well as enhancing their capacities for innovative thinking, leadership, and societal awareness, we prepare our students to make significant contributions to society.”

Working under the banner of Relevance through Engagement, the universities identified three interconnected ways in which institutions of higher education can accelerate the development of social innovations. The first involves applying knowledge and teaching to address real-world problems. The second will see knowledge mobilization complementing traditional scholarship by working closely with research partners. The third area focuses on continuing to develop established and emerging leaders of social innovation. The three universities will develop relationships with national agencies, foundations and funders to explore each of these aspects so they can share and disseminate practices that will enhance each university’s contributions to social innovation.

The British High Commission provided the financial support for the meeting.

Communities of Practice and Communities of Definition / Communautés de pratique et communautés de définition

Bronwynne Wilton* & Anne Bergen**, RIR-University of Guelph

What happens when a diverse group of academics and government staff get together to discuss the role of the knowledge broker in the research to action cycle?  Lots of different opinions of course!  And this is exactly what happened at a recent meeting of the Guelph Knowledge Translation and Transfer (KTT) Community of Practice. But perhaps, the more we differ, the more we might actually have in common.

Que se passe-t-il lorsqu’un groupe hétérogène formé de chercheurs et de travailleurs de la fonction publique se réunit afin de discuter du rôle de courtier de connaissances dans le cycle recherche-action. Un foule d’opinions diverses, évidemment! Et c’est exactement ce qui s’est produit lors d’une récente rencontre de la Communauté de pratique sur le circulation et le transfert des connaissances de Guelph. Peut-être qu’en fait, plus grandes sont les différences, plus le potentiel d’avoir quelque chose en commun est grand.  

“I see myself as a connector” commented one participant in a recent meeting of the Guelph Knowledge Translation and Transfer (KTT) Community of Practice.  Another saw themselves as a facilitator of researcher-stakeholder collaborations while a third person noted their role as being something of a bridge between high quality information from extensive data sets and the general public.  This cross-section of roles at the first Guelph KTT Community of Practice meeting of the year demonstrates the wide variety of both individuals and perspectives within the emerging field of knowledge mobilization (KMb).

With the starting point of an interesting post on the Knowledge Brokers’ Forum (Lock, 2013) about the roles and identities that knowledge brokers might take on – the Guelph KTT CoP discussion was off to a great start.

Participants’ self-defined roles and professional identities spanned the continuum of KTT/KMb: some work as knowledge brokers, others as knowledge synthesizers and translators, some in technology transfer, some develop and promote toolkits to engage the public and others carry out primary research and wonder about non-traditional forms of knowledge dissemination.

As highlighted in the multiple and often diverse collaborative definitions within the “What is KT” wiki referenced above, within the CoP, the language we use to define our professional identities might reflect where our KTT/KMb work is situated. Moreover, the language we use to define our professional identities may also reflect some of the major barriers to doing that work. The ways in which we practice KTT/KMb, and the ways in which we talk about this work, depends very much on our institutional cultures. People working in the human health and veterinarian science side of KTT, talk about the difficulties of reaching “end users” with synthesized and translated best practices. In contrast, the words “stakeholders” and “research partners” were used more frequently by participants from both the agricultural and social science fields.  This may reflect the increasingly important and necessary process of collaboratively defining a research problem early on in the research cycle.

One of the key topics discussed was the ways in which a knowledge broker might actively engage their audience(s) in the research process to encourage more uptake of research results.  There was general agreement that more effective uptake of knowledge is associated with earlier end-user or stakeholder involvement and engagement, not only in the “results dissemination” phase of research, but throughout the research process.  However, this approach was challenged by a question about when ‘science’ is ready for end-user uptake, whether that be informing policy or affecting practice or programs, and when is there a need to simply inform the next cycle of scientific inquiry on a given topic.  In other words, pivotal questions for many practicing in the KTT/KMb area are “when is the body of knowledge on a given issue robust enough to inform decision-making?” and “who makes that call?”.

These points emphasize the importance of effective knowledge synthesis and translation in the knowledge mobilization process. In terms of our roles as knowledge brokers, do we carry out this synthesis and translation work? Or is this activity one that should be undertaken by the researcher?  It is also worthwhile to acknowledge the concern that any uptake by the media or interest by the general public might result in misrepresentation of the research. Where multiple audiences exist, there may be tensions between tailored messages aimed at the public and those targeted towards specialized practitioners.

Considering the complexity and the multiple dimensions of accelerating the uptake of knowledge from research, we might view the knowledge broker role as both a gatekeeper on the quality of the knowledge to be disseminated, and simultaneously, as a facilitator of relationships between researchers and end-users.  The Guelph KTT CoP discussed the importance of trust and credibility between researchers and stakeholders, and more broadly, with the general public as well.  Understanding and managing expectations among the various partners and audiences in the knowledge creation process was also viewed as a key role for the knowledge broker to play.

The richness of this discussion between such a diverse cross-section of government and academia representatives demonstrates the real value of crossing our institutional, departmental, and disciplinary boundaries to talk about the intersections between knowledge creation and knowledge uptake.   With open minds to share our collective experiences, we can continue to inform and improve our practices in our respective areas of interest.

References

Knowledge Brokering (n.d.). In What is KT Wiki. Retrieved March 4, 2013 from http://whatiskt.wikispaces.com/Knowledge+Brokering

Knowledge Dissemination (n.d.). In What is KT Wiki. Retrieved March 4, 2013 from http://whatiskt.wikispaces.com/Knowledge+Dissemination

Knowledge Synthesis (n.d.). In What is KT Wiki. Retrieved March 4, 2013 from http://whatiskt.wikispaces.com/Knowledge+Synthesis

Knowledge Translation (n.d.). In What is KT Wiki. Retrieved March 4, 2013 from http://whatiskt.wikispaces.com/Knowledge+Translation

Knowledge Transfer (n.d.). In What is KT Wiki. Retrieved March 4, 2013 from http://whatiskt.wikispaces.com/Knowledge+Transfer

Lock, D. (2013, January 7). Professional identities. Message posted to http://www.knowledgebrokersforum.org/wiki/514122

*Bronwynne Wilton is the Manager of the OMAF and MRA- University of Guelph Knowledge Mobilization and Communication Programs for the Office of Research, Strategic Partnerships at the University of Guelph.

**Anne Bergen is the Knowledge Mobilization Coordinator for the College of Social and Applied Sciences and the Institute for Community Engaged Scholarship at the University of Guelph.

Originally posted at http://bit.ly/ZgDRdi  reposted with permission.

Winter Weather Knowledge Mobilization / Mobilisation des connaissances hivernale

Erin Nelson, RIR-Guelph

Erin Nelson is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Guelph’s ICES/The Research Shop. A specialist in food security and sustainable food systems, one of the projects she is currently coordinating focuses on supporting efforts in Ontario to connect children and youth to good food, through experiential education, school meal programs, and other innovative endeavours.

Erin Nelson est stagiaire post-doctorale à l’ICES/The Research Shop de l’Université de Guelph. Spécialiste en sécurité alimentaire et en systèmes alimentaires durables, elle coordonne présentement un projet ontarien qui soutient les efforts de mise en contact des enfants et des jeunes avec la nourriture saine. Cela se fait à travers l’éducation expérientielle, les programmes alimentaires scolaires et d’autres initiatives innovantes.

Many people probably remember this past February 8^th – the day that Winter Storm Nemo (or “Snowpocalypse”) hit Ontario, shutting down roads, leaving people stranded in airports, and causing school closures, among other things. As a Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Guelph’s Institute for Community Engaged Scholarship (ICES), my normal reaction to the university’s decision to close due to extreme weather would be glee. (I truly love my job but, as a lifelong winter enthusiast, I love a good snow day as well.) Unfortunately, February 8^th was the day I had scheduled the “Say ‘Yes!’ to Good Food Education Design Charrette” – the cornerstone event of a KTT project I’m coordinating.

Erin Nelson

With funding from the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) KTT Funding Program (part of the Ministry’s partnership with the University of Guelph), the Good Food Education Project involves collaborative research and KTT to promote efforts aimed at connecting children and youth in Ontario to ‘good food’, or food that is healthy for people, the environment, and the province’s farm economy. The main community collaborators on the project are Sustain Ontario, Ontario Agri-Food Education (OAFE), FoodShare, and Everdale Organic Farm and Environmental Learning Centre; however, many more stakeholders from Ontario’s food education sector – from teachers and school boards, to public health units, to non-profit agencies, to policy-makers – have been involved as well, and much of the project work is being done by volunteer graduate student interns at ICES’ ‘Research Shop’. All of us were incredibly excited to be coming together for a full day of networking, information-sharing, and collaborative planning, so the 6am announcement of a snow day – and automatic cancellation of the event – was a big disappointment.

By 8:00 am I had checked in with Sustain Ontario Director Ravenna Nuaimy-Barker. She was already in Guelph, along with steering committee members of Ontario’s new Child and Youth Food Network, who had travelled from across the province for a day of strategic planning ahead of the charrette. They were all gathered at their hotel, so we decided to make some knowledge mobilization happen in spite of a winter storm’s best efforts to stop us. I strapped on my cross-country skis and headed out to meet them. My frustration at the weather’s bad timing was alleviated by the cheerful encouragement I received from passersby as I made my way through the snowy streets to the Best Western, where I arrived somewhat disheveled  with a thick coating of ice on my hair. The journey was well worth it, as I had the chance to engage face-to-face with people who have a direct stake in the food education work we are doing. They were enthusiastic about the research that has been done to date – eager to share results online and use them to aid their action planning. That enthusiasm, and everyone’s evident passion for good food education, was infectious, passing to me and, at a meeting the following week, to the project interns. We are all now busy planning for the rescheduled charrette, which will be held Friday, April 19^th at Guelph’s Arboretum Centre.

If anyone is interested in learning more about the event, or the Good Food Education project in general, feel free to contact me. I’m also happy to provide tips on extreme winter weather knowledge mobilization strategies.

Crowdsourcing the Future of Knowledge Mobilization / Crowdsourcing, le future de la mobilisation des connaissances

David Phipps, RIR-York

Next time you’re making a presentation consider crowdsourcing part of it.  It keeps you on your toes and allows for great audience engagement but also takes “chutzpah” to handle the submissions and the surprises.

La prochaine fois que vous ferez une présentation, pensez à faire appel au crowdsourcing. Cette façon de faire vous tient aux aguets et permet à votre public de s’impliquer de façon notable, mais cela demande également un peu de “chutzpah” pour faire face aux propositions et aux surprises.

Saskatchewan Literacy Network

I was invited to make a keynote presentation at the Canadian Knowledge Mobilization Forum 2012. I spoke about my predictions for the future of knowledge mobilization in Canada butI also did something I had never done before. While I was speaking I asked the audience to write down their own predictions. These were collected and I spoke to each of them off the cuff, commenting on the crowd’s opinions of our directions as a profession and practice. It was fun because it kept me on my toes and it allowed the audience to co-create part of the presentation. I wrote about these crowdsourced opinions starting on page 15 of the report on the Forum.

I did the same when I was invited to speak to the Saskatchewan Literacy Network on November 15, 2012. Since Bonnie Zink and Karen Rosser asked me to include social media in my presentation I asked the crowd to tell me what  they thought of social media and knowledge mobilization in five years.  Sidebar: let me give a shout out to Karen and Bonnie.  Karen for running a great forum and Bonnie for being… well… Bonnie. Bonnie is a great promoter of knowledge mobilization and communication. She is an über tweeter, blogger (see her guest blog on Mobilize This!), pinner on Pinterest… you name she’s probably there. She also knits (constantly) and likes cats… what’s not to love and admire about Bonnie!

Bonnie also transcribed the crowd sourced comments from the audience. There were 17 responses which I grouped as follows:

Group	N*	Example
Local to global	3	Global users of social media for policy makers, youth, adults to exchange information and decision making
Collaboration	3	Easier and or free access for learners to social media, deliberate collaboration – partnering researchers and community
Access	6	A smart phone will cost less than $10.00 and access to Internet will be more readily available – then only it will be an inclusive way of sharing information and knowledge
Norming	6	Will be the way of doing “business” throughout the province by connecting business/industry/education/communities
Critical thinking	2	If we don’t start thinking critically about social media, the future of knowledge mobilization is not very promising – research will get “translated” into superficial messaged and become useless in making a difference in real life situations The policy-making half of the KMb equation needs to work on utilizing the knowledge

*some of the 17 comments were in more than one group

Norming is the increased use of social media as a standard tool of doing business. Access is concerned with ensuring there is equitable access to social media and other web based tools. I like that these two were more commonly cited than the others.  Norming is important as we are seeing a rise in the use of a variety of social media; although we have a tough time evaluating the impact and we need to think critically about our use of social media and not just jump on the latest social media bandwagon. For our critical thinking on social media in knowledge mobilization take a look at a book chapter that we published last summer. Access is also clearly an important element for a literacy audience where computer literacy and lack of literacy skills can be a barrier to use of some on line content. We need to ensure that there is not a digital divide between different knowledge mobilization stakeholders whether this is learner/teacher partners, North/South partners or community/university partners.

There are many benefits to including crowdsourcing in your presentations as mentioned above but it also can be risky as you need to be able to range far and wide beyond the boundaries of your planned speech or presentation. You need to be able to pull up factoids from the literature or from your practice or the practice of others to be able to provide meaningful commentary on the submissions. You also need to be able to lob the question comfortably back to the audience as I did with one access comment about literacy as a barrier. The audience knew way more about that than I did and I was pleased to moderate a lively discussion on that topic by various members of the audience. Access as a topic for the 2013 SaskLit conference, perhaps?

And then there are the fun surprises. There was one comment, “I think this conversation is going to see an expansion of knowledge mobilization. It will be a government department specifically focused on disseminating knowledge based on research”. Now there’s a utopian view of the future of knowledge mobilization!

Research Forum Provides New Perspective on Ways to End Youth Homelessness

The following was originally posted in YFile, York University’s Daily News, on November 26, 2012 and is reposted here with permission.

A systems approach is needed to respond to youth homelessness in York Region and Canada. This was the message at yesterday’s research forum: Re-Imagining Our Response to Youth Homelessness: A Canadian and Global Perspective, organized by United Way York Region (UWYR) and York University at the Markham Convergence Centre.

“A multi-sectoral approach is necessary. Non-profit organizations, universities, governments and other key stakeholders have to work together to end youth homelessness and move forward with one clear vision,” said keynote speaker Stephen Gaetz, York University professor and director of the Canadian Homelessness Research Network. “We need to reconsider our response to youth homelessness and shift our focus away from an emphasis on emergency supports towards prevention and rapid rehousing.”

Representatives from a variety of sectors gathered at the Markham Convergence Centre to talk about an effective response to youth homelessness in York Region and Canada.

The research forum was organized by UWYR in partnership with York University’s Knowledge Mobilization (KMb) Unit through a one-year Public Outreach Grant from the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Stephen Gaetz

“We see this event as a great opportunity to invite people to think differently about youth homelessness and learn from other jurisdictions,” said Jane Wedlock, knowledge mobilization officer, UWYR. “And we can consider whether we might explore some of these different approaches.”

Examples were drawn from different Canadian provinces and other countries that have undertaken some innovative approaches to addressing youth homelessness.

“It was impressive to see York research at a forum designed to facilitate relationship building, a two-way exchange between academic researchers and practitioners in social service provision, all with one common vision to support positive changes in addressing issues of youth homelessness in York Region,” said Michael Johnny, manager of knowledge mobilization at York University.

“Research Forums, such as the one held yesterday, are an important process of effective knowledge mobilization by creating a culture of collaboration and realizing the potential for research to have a direct and positive impact for York Region,” said Johnny.

For more information, visit the UWYR website.

KT: The Heart of the Innovation Journey / Le coeur du parcours de l’innovation

Bonnie Zink

Bonnie Zink, Corporate Writer, Researcher & Editor­­

In this guest post, Bonnie Zink writes about her experience at the recent Health Research Transfer Network of Alberta conference. From rock, paper, scissors to smart neural prostheses it sounds like this conference covered a lot of ground. Thanks Bonnie for telling us about the conference.

Dans ce billet, la blogueuse invitée Bonnie Zink relate sa participation à la récente conférence du Health Research Transfer Network of Alberta. De roche, papier, ciseaux aux prothèses neuronales intelligentes, il semble que cette conférence ait couvert bien du terrain. Merci Bonnie pour cet aperçu de la conférence.

In today’s increasingly digital and networked world, continual learning is an important part of our work. As knowledge workers, we look to connect with professionals in our field, collect a diversity of perspectives about the work that we do, and seek learning opportunities that allow us to share our experiences with and learn from each other. Conferences provide these very opportunities, but there are precious few knowledge translation (KT) specific conferences in Canada.

Nestled in the heart of Alberta, there is an annual knowledge translation specific conference, hosted by the Health Research Transfer Network of Alberta (RTNA), that helps us connect, share, and learn. Since 2002, this annual gathering of  KT professionals has provided those of us working in the KT field the opportunity to sharpen our skills, discuss advances and challenges in moving knowledge into action, maximize knowledge exchange by connecting with others in our field, and add new practices to our KT toolkits.

Day One:

The 2012 organizers define knowledge translation as a “deliberate, two-way, iterative process of using evidence to help inform decisions” and challenged participants to discover the “key ingredients for doing this successfully.” In other words, what knowledge, skills, and tools do we need to make knowledge translation effective?

Over the course of three days, we soon discovered that improving the way research is done and how results are disseminated (“Translation of Medical Evidence into Practice: Failures and Improvements” by John Ioannidis, Professor, Stanford School of Medicine) could ensure that quality evidence makes it to publication and informs the process of what should  be studied.

Susan Nall Bales, President of the Frameworks Institute, talked about “Changing the Conversation – Effectively translating Research for the Public?”  The necessity of having better information and a better grasp of research helps us make better decisions for ourselves and the communities we live in and making messages easier for people to understand will help us reach our KT goals.

Day One wrapped up with Dr. Judy Birdsell guiding us through an overview of the RTNA, currently celebrating its ten-year anniversary, its roots, and its future.  A celebratory dinner brought Doug Walker, Trigger Communications and founder of the international Rock, Paper, Scissors Society, to encourage us to think about whether an idea is valid to consider “What if [that] Idea Wasn’t Stupid?” It may be that no idea is so “stupid” that it would not succeed if promoted and executed well.

Day Two:

Rena Sorenson & Doug Walker at the Rock, Paper, Scissors Competition, RTNA KT conference 2012

Day Two was all about celebrating successful KT methods and considering solutions to the challenges many of us face while moving research into the hands of those who can use it to effectively promote positive social change.  Grouped by theme, concurrent rounds of abstract presentations addressed implementing effective KT strategies,  strategic planning methods to enable a successful KT plan, innovative approaches to KT, the role of the KT professional, and fostering collaborative partnerships between researchers, practitioners and policy makers.

Each year the best of the best receive recognition and this year’s winners were:

• Reviewer’s Choice Award for Best Abstract: Ryan McCarthy, former Director of KT at Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), for his evaluation of KT at CIHR
• Best Poster Award: Mandy Bellows, Clinical Nurse Specialist with Alberta Health Services, for her poster on “Creating a Patient Engagement Resource Kit”
• Best Oral Presentation Award: Heather Scarlett-Ferguson, Addiction and Mental Health with Alberta Health Services, for her innovative and creative analogy of KT being similar to map folding, “Found in Translation – Fostering Collaboration between Researchers, Practitioners, and Policy Makers.”

Lunch with the Experts is a great opportunity is a great way to connect with leading experts in a number of fields. Participants were able to connect with best practices about using video effectively, communities of practice, ethics for community-based research and evaluation, using Wikis, navigating the policy world, and facilitating conversations.

Day Two wrapped up with Dave Walker and Doug Walker encouraging us to resist the temptation to focus on the tools and technology involved in social media and to focus on discovering the why of what we are doing when it comes to social media. The “Social Media Cafe” introduced us to proven processes that leading organizations use to understand their unique social media opportunities and develop meaningful strategies that deliver results.  Both presenters reminded us that social is people and not technology – it is all about building relationships and making the  connections that matter.

Day Three:

John Lavis

The conference wrapped up with Dr. John Lavis, Professor and Director at McMaster Health Forum, providing a brief overview of the state of research and its role in supporting evidence- informed policymaking.  Dr. Vivian Mushahwar, Associate Professor at the University of Alberta, followed with a tale of innovation and lessons learned as the Smart Neural Prostheses interdisciplinary team navigated the KT journey as they brought Smart-e Pants from discovery to product launch.

One way to accomplish our learning objectives is to attend quality conferences, which allow us to make the connections that matter, learn new skills, and discover best practices in order to improve our own practice.

The 2012 KMb at York Annual Summit / Le Sommet 2012 de la MdC à York

Michael Johnny, RIR – York

The entire team of York’s Knowledge Mobilization Unit met August 17 for an annual summit. On the agenda was unstructured time to explore new technology followed by working the left side of our brains in arts-based activities (ok, truth is we played!).

Toute l’équipe de l’Unité de mobilisation des connaissances de York s’est réunie le 17 août pour un sommet annuel. Au programme, une période non structurée pour explorer de nouvelles technologies suivies d’un atelier visant à faire travailler le côté gauche de notre cerveau par le biais d’activités artistiques (OK, en fait, nous avons joué!).

If there is one complement our service unit gets on a consistent basis, it is the strength of our technical presence within the wonderful world of KMb.  Our website, twitter, delicious, blogging on wordpress, our use of O3, YouTube, bit.ly, tiki-toki, and recently the use of slideshare have all helped to amplify our work as brokers, and more important, shine a light on the collaborative projects we helped broker and support.

On August 17, as part of our annual KMb Summit, the entire team of York’s KMb Unit met offsite for some unstructured time to think, dream and discuss technology.  This is an important annual conversation for us and we started with a  review of our existing suite of technology.  More important, and more exciting, was an examination of new possibilities for us.  Platforms like Pinterest, Prezi, Paper.li, Doculectures, Storify, Basecamp and Slideshare were demonstrated, discussed and dissected within the team.  Seven new platforms in one morning, not too bad! All were interesting but we reminded ourselves to be wary of the shiny object syndrome. New social media tools will only be introduced if they have an audience and make sense for our business processes.

The day then continued as we all headed out to Snakes and Lattes for lunch and some left brain exercise.  Snowshoes or Show Shoes, really, the difference is subtle.  Safe to say that while our artistic talents pale in comparison to our abilities to mobilize knowledge, we will remain a hard-working and fun-loving group!

In closing, special thanks to the summer students of 2012 for their excellent work!  Read more about our students and their successful summer very soon!!  Thanks, too, to Jane Wedlock, Knowledge Mobilization Officer at United Way York Region for joining us.  She’s an important part of the team! Thanks also to Robyn Read of Ben Levin’s Research Supporting Practice in Education group for providing us with the space to play downtown. In her words “I am impressed every time I see your group in action”.

And that drink with the OISE and McMaster groups… count us in!

How to Assess the Impact of Your Research / Comment mesurer l’impact de votre recherche

Michael Johnny, RIR-York

Impact has become a significant component of the research cycle but how does one actually do this?  Dr. Sarah Morton from the University of Edinburgh offers a one-day workshop with methodologies to assess the impact of your research.

L’impact est devenu un aspect très important du cycle de la recherche, mais comment doit-on procéder pour le mesurer? La professeure Sarah Morton de l’Université d’Édimbourg offre un atelier d’une journée au cours duquel sont présentées des méthodologies permettant de mesurer l’impact de vos recherches.

David Phipps of York University (@researchimpact) has recently written about Knowledge Hypocrites.  Well, I for one am taking action (sort of).  I wouldn’t exactly call myself a bookworm, but I am taking opportunity to learn from other professionals to help inform my practice.  Perhaps not a direct solution to David’s point, but I am happy about opportunities to learn from leaders in KMb from Canada and internationally.

A recent post shared my experience attending a workshop from Peter Levesque of Knowledge Mobilization Works.  The following week I attended a day-long session led by Sarah Morton (recently Dr. Sarah Morton) of the University of Edinburgh, Co-Director Communication and Knowledge Exchange within the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.  The topic of Sarah’s workshop was how to assess the impact of your research.

I was one of 12 present and felt I was in a unique position, whereas I am not directly involved in or leading a research project, but play a brokering role in developing research projects.  For the purposes of the workshop I used York University’s partnership with the United Way of York Region as an example (we are piloting a community knowledge broker role).  For me, in my experience, impact is misunderstood with outcomes, or even outputs.  So it was refreshing (and validating) for me to hear Sarah speak about a process of inputs, activities, uptake, use and impact.

The significant takeaway for me was a mapping exercise which will help me working with university researchers in developing knowledge mobilization plans.  In Sarah’s research and experience, embarking on a process of examining potential assumptions and risks around the process listed above can actually help determine potential indicators around impact.  Unlocking a procedure to support this process will help me in my brokering work.  The fact that I can employ the tools and not have to read Sarah’s dissertation makes my life somewhat easier.  Can I declare myself hypocrisy-free?  No, not yet, but I do prefer this active process of knowledge exchange.  My thanks to Sarah for sharing her research and methodologies to further unpack the notion of impact in research.