Knowledge Brokering: key ideas in practice
What is
knowledge brokering? How can it help you? How can knowledge brokering help your business? Recent articles point to two major benefits:
- Knowledge brokering (KB) can help you to find new ideas which can help your business. You may not be aware of some great ideas, simply because they have been applied in business areas well outside your own. KB allows you to close the gap, between the diverse sources of knowledge and the local area which needs that knowledge.
- Government policy is set by people with practical knowledge; policy research is done by academics. Because the two groups are separated, essential knowledge may not flow, from research to practice. KB allows you to close the gap, between good theory and practical application.
In various articles on
knowledge brokering the point is made, that there is a gap between where knowledge exists and where it is needed. Knowledge brokering (KB) allows you to close the gap, (1) between theoretical interests of researchers and the practical needs of managers and (2) between success stories in one industry and knowledge needs in another.
Management journals such as McKinsey Quarterly and HBR discuss knowledge brokering. To help you get started, I have extracted some key points from research articles and explained their relevance to the practical needs of policy making and business practice.
Practical knowledge brokering
Knowledge brokering is a specialised form of
knowledge transfer; there are few clear descriptions of knowledge transfer itself (Ward, House & Hammer, 2009). Knowledge brokering takes an idea from one context then adapts and applies it to another situation. This is more than just cut and paste (Billington & Davidson, 2008). Much of the skill – and power – of knowledge brokering is in the
adaptation of knowledge to a new environment.
The key steps of knowledge brokering are, below, analysed and synthesised from several articles (Ward, House & Hammer, 2009), (Billington & Davidson, 2008).
KB for solving a business problem
- Get together the people who need to solve a problem. Name the person who will be responsible for finding a solution. (This is standard project initiation; knowledge brokering can and should be run as a project.)
- The KB project team identifies and refines, documents and agrees their key issues. One key issue which must be agreed, is the scope of the process which needs to be fixed.
- Identify and gain access to relevant "experts".
- Run a three or four day, off-site process redesign "event". (This suggestion is from an organisation which offers facilitation of such an event. You may choose another approach to the KB project – but you must still be prepared to dedicate time and effort to the project.)
- Knowledge brokering: facilitated interactions between participants and the experts(*)
- Rapid prototyping: brainstorm the new process
- Collective intelligence: vote for what will work.
(*) In fact this step – knowledge brokering at the problem-solving workshop – is the only new point in KB process design. In its Six Sigma quality processes, GE includes one-day problem-solving workshops. If you formally add access to external "experts", the workshops become KB workshops.
Finding the relevant experts
It's all very well to say, Talk to the experts. But which experts? This is the key
new point of knowledge brokering: You may not know, or have ready access to, the most relevant experts.
One organisation offers knowledge brokering services (Simonian, 2007). The organisation appears to arrange access to its own network of "problem solvers" rather than true sources of relevant knowledge. Several points are still important to KB:
- There may be barriers, such as intellectual property rights.
- Some people may have answers to problems but the right question has never been asked. Or, the question may not have been asked of the right person.
- Retirees, and women who left the workforce to raise a family represent a largely untapped source of knowledge. Independent geeks, who are often unsuited to traditional working environments, may be brilliant problem solvers. "Rising affluence means some people can now work when and how they want. By becoming part of a network, people can remain involved and still feel valid, without having to join the conventional workforce."
Finding the relevant knowledge
Knowledge brokering is not just problem solving. The problem may have already been solved... but not in your own industry. You need access to other
sources of knowledge.
You already attend meetings of industry leaders from your own industry. In the interests of knowledge brokering – of gaining access to a wider range of good ideas – you may need to join industry and professional groups from other areas. Or, at least, to read more widely.
Knowledge brokering refers to the processes of transferring and translating meaning between members of different communities of practice (Beers, 2003). You – or a knowledge broker – need to identify and access those different communities of practice.
One article points out that IT (information technology) staff may already be "knowledge brokers" within your own organisation (Pawlowski & Robey, 2004). IT workers implement an information system in one area. They then implement or adapt that same system in another area of your organisation; the IT worker is transferring knowledge from one area to another. A "best practice" externally-sourced IT system provides a similar, more formalised, KB benefit.
Knowledge brokering and innovation
If you are looking for
innovation as a means of business improvement, Harvard Business Review had this to say: "The best innovators use old ideas as the raw materials for new ideas, a strategy called knowledge brokering" (Hargadon & Sutton, 2000). The first and vital step, is capturing good ideas from a wide variety of sources... the essence of knowledge brokering.
In an earlier article, one of those authors identified tactics for successful innovation through KB (Hargadon, 1998):
- Explore new territories, to give yourself more knowledge to draw upon when facing a new problem.
- Learn something about everything. The more you know, the more knowledge you can apply to a new situation.
- Find hidden connections. Look for common factors that allow you to apply old ideas to new situations.
- "Make the damn thing work."
Knowledge brokering for government policy
Several articles focus on a specific area where knowledge brokering is essential: formulating government policy. Academics love to analyse government policy-making. Academics, economists and others analyse data which could form a basis for effective policy. Policy is set by people who do not have time to examine all available research in a search for possible relevance.
One article says that, "most research-to-policy approaches were owned and driven by the research community and usually dominated by academic think tanks and health policy research departments at universities or national institutes." There were "three main categories [of policy-making]: most common researcher-push strategy; less common policy-maker-pull strategy; and least common interactive push-pull strategy" (van Kammen, de Savigny & Sewankambo, 2006).
Knowledge brokering starts with the recognition that creating knowledge (research) and formulating policy (practice) are two different processes. The focus of knowledge brokering is on organizing an interactive process between the producers (researchers) and users (policy-makers) of knowledge so that they can, together, produce feasible policy based on relevant research. In one effective example, these steps were followed:
- Researchers were commissioned to provide a synthesis of research, to document the main messages from the research. The researchers integrated evidence from specific studies, weighted the evidence by means of a systematic review of international literature, and added a practical description of what it all meant.
- Researchers and policy-makers analysed the actual situation requiring a new policy. They then applied each of the main messages from the research, to key aspects of the policy situation.
- Results from the first two steps were packaged in the form of reality-based scenarios. These scenarios, containing realistic and feasible policy options, were discussed with stakeholders and policy options were agreed. This stage was facilitated by an independent facilitator with knowledge in the policy area.
In effect, all relevant information was analysed and summarised. A series of options – based on both research and reality – was developed.
At this point, having developed a full range of options, policy-makers could add political intent, practical limitations, stakeholder bias and other factors to the policy decision.
In less words, the KB process was structured "in three distinct steps: (i) agreement about the main messages from the research, (ii) analysis of the policy context and of the meaning of the main messages for the actors involved, and (iii) an invitational meeting to make recommendations for action" (Van Kammen, Jansen, Bonsel, Kremer, et al., 2006).
The benefit of knowledge brokering is, that independent research and expertise is available to be included up front. Key options and potential problems are not overlooked. Policy depends largely on the intent of the policy-makers. Knowledge brokering ensures that essential knowledge is also included, examined and applied where relevant.
Knowledge broking benefits
As with knowledge brokering for solving a business problem, the aim is to "close the know-do gap". A business may not be aware of an existing solution; KB closes the gap, from existing knowledge to those who are looking for it. In policy-making, there may be relevant, available knowledge but there is too much to be included in decision-making. KB closes the gap, with an intermediary commissioned to identify relevant knowledge and to present it in a useful format.
..o0o.. | Independent Thinking |
|---|
Independent analysis of your problems
by Agamedes Consulting. Support for your thought:
email nick leth at gmail dot com |
References
Beers, 2003:
Organizational learning in multidisciplinary teams: Knowledge brokering across communities of practice by Robin L. Beers, Ph.D., Alliant International University, San Francisco Bay, 2003 , 334 pages.
Billington & Davidson, 2008: Want to Improve your Below-Average Business Processes? -- Innovate don't Invent by Corey Billington, Rhoda Davidson. Perspectives for Managers. Lausanne: Jul 2008. p. 1
Hargadon, 1998 Firms as knowledge brokers: Lessons in pursuing continuous innovation by Andrew B Hargadon. California Management Review. Berkeley: Spring 1998. Vol. 40, Iss. 3; pg. 209, 19 pgs
Hargadon & Sutton, 2000 Building an innovation factory by Andrew Hargadon, Robert I Sutton. Harvard Business Review. Boston: May/Jun 2000. Vol. 78, Iss. 3; pg. 157, 10 pgs
Pawlowski & Robey, 2004: Bridging User Organizations: Knowledge Brokering and the Work of Information Technology Professionals by Suzanne D Pawlowski, Daniel Robey. MIS Quarterly. Minneapolis: Dec 2004. Vol. 28, Iss. 4; pg. 645, 28 pgs (available from Amazon)
Simonian, 2007: A problem shared is a problem solved. Using old ideas in new ways is the art of "knowledge broker" Corey Billington of IMD by Haig Simonian. Financial Times. London (UK): Aug 6, 2007. pg. 12
van Kammen, de Savigny & Sewankambo, 2006: Using knowledge brokering to promote evidence-based policy-making: the need for support structures by Jessika van Kammen, Don de Savigny, Nelson Sewankambo. World Health Organization. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. Geneva: Aug 2006. Vol. 84, Iss. 8; pg. 608, 5 pgs
van Kammen, Jansen, Bonsel, Kremer, et al., 2006: Technology assessment and knowledge brokering: The case of assisted reproduction in The Netherlands by Jessika Van Kammen, Carin W Jansen, Gouke J Bonsel, Jan A M Kremer, et al. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. Cambridge: Jul 2006. Vol. 22, Iss. 3; pg. 302, 5 pgs
Ward, House & Hammer, 2009: Knowledge brokering: Exploring the process of transferring knowledge into action. by Vicky L Ward, Allan O House, Susan Hamer. BMC Health Services Research. 2009. Vol. 9 pg. 12
