Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America.
Center for Evidence Based Health Care, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Feb 10;18(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0516-0.
Relationships between researchers and decision-makers have demonstrated positive potential to influence research, policy and practice. Over time, interest in better understanding the relationships between the two parties has grown as demonstrated by a plethora of studies globally. However, what remains elusive is the evolution of these vital relationships and what can be learned from them with respect to advancing evidence-informed decision-making. We therefore explored the nuances around the initiation, maintenance and dissolution of academic-government relationships.
We conducted in-depth interviews with 52 faculty at one school of public health and 24 government decision-makers at city, state, federal and global levels. Interviews were transcribed and coded deductively and inductively using Atlas.Ti. Responses across codes and respondents were extracted into an Excel matrix and compared in order to identify key themes.
Eight key drivers to engagement were identified, namely (1) decision-maker research needs, (2) learning, (3) access to resources, (4) student opportunities, (5) capacity strengthening, (6) strategic positioning, (7) institutional conditionalities, and (8) funder conditionalities. There were several elements that enabled initiation of relationships, including the role of faculty members in the decision-making process, individual attributes and reputation, institutional reputation, social capital, and the role of funders. Maintenance of partnerships was dependent on factors such as synergistic collaboration (i.e. both benefit), mutual trust, contractual issues and funding. Dissolution of relationships resulted from champions changing/leaving positions, engagement in transactional relationships, or limited mutual trust and respect.
As universities and government agencies establish relationships and utilise opportunities to share ideas, envision change together, and leverage their collaborations to use evidence to inform decision-making, a new modus operandi becomes possible. Embracing the individual, institutional, networked and systems dynamics of relationships can lead to new practices, alternate approaches and transformative change. Government agencies, schools of public health and higher education institutions more broadly, should pay deliberate attention to identifying and managing the various drivers, enablers and disablers for relationship initiation and resilience in order to promote more evidence-informed decision-making.
研究人员与决策者之间的关系已被证明具有积极影响,可以促进研究、政策和实践。随着时间的推移,人们对更好地理解这两者之间关系的兴趣与日俱增,这一点在全球范围内的大量研究中得到了体现。然而,这些至关重要的关系是如何演变的,以及从中可以学到什么来推进循证决策,仍然难以捉摸。因此,我们探讨了学术与政府关系建立、维系和破裂的微妙之处。
我们对一所公共卫生学院的 52 名教师和市、州、联邦和全球各级的 24 名政府决策者进行了深入访谈。访谈内容被转录并使用 Atlas.ti 进行了演绎和归纳编码。通过代码和受访者提取响应到 Excel 矩阵中,并进行比较,以确定关键主题。
确定了八项参与的关键驱动因素,分别是:(1)决策者的研究需求;(2)学习;(3)获取资源;(4)学生机会;(5)能力建设;(6)战略定位;(7)机构条件;(8)资助者条件。有几个因素可以促成关系的建立,包括教师在决策过程中的作用、个人特质和声誉、机构声誉、社会资本以及资助者的作用。伙伴关系的维系取决于协同合作(即双方受益)、相互信任、契约问题和资金等因素。关系的破裂是由于领导者改变/离职、参与交易关系,或缺乏相互信任和尊重。
随着大学和政府机构建立关系并利用机会分享想法,共同设想变革,并利用合作利用证据为决策提供信息,一种新的运作模式成为可能。接受关系的个人、机构、网络和系统动态,可以带来新的实践、替代方法和变革性的变化。政府机构、公共卫生学院和更广泛的高等教育机构应特别注意确定和管理关系建立和恢复的各种驱动因素、促成因素和障碍因素,以促进更多的循证决策。