{"title":"Knowledge brokering for public sector reform","authors":"Honae Cuffe","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>Better use of evidence is at the centre of the ambitious Australian Public Sector Reform agenda, providing an authorising environment in which to test new ideas, tools, and approaches to bridge the research–practice gap. As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers have a critical role to play in promoting the structural and behavioural changes necessary to build the knowledge networks and new capabilities that enable an evidence ecosystem. In particular, this article makes a case for harnessing the relational nature of knowledge brokering and trialling new mechanisms for research–practitioner collaboration and evidence innovation. It is hoped that this article can serve as the foundation for a future research and practice agenda examining how knowledge brokering operates and where university‐produced research can best support evidence‐based reform.Points for practitioners<jats:list list-type=\"bullet\"> <jats:list-item>As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers can encourage the cross‐boundary thinking, genuine partnerships, and new capabilities to support evidence‐based reform.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>The Australian Public Sector Reform agenda provides a unique opportunity to trial new mechanisms and approaches to expand understanding of how knowledge brokering operates in practice and the conditions that support successful research–practice collaboration.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Mechanisms should be formal and accompanied by bureaucratic‐level support and incentives, providing them with the legitimacy needed to embed new mindsets, capabilities, and ways of working.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>A key consideration for public sector practitioners is how to establish arrangements and incentives that are mutually beneficial for researchers and practitioners alike and monitor the effectiveness of these initiatives over time.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12665","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Better use of evidence is at the centre of the ambitious Australian Public Sector Reform agenda, providing an authorising environment in which to test new ideas, tools, and approaches to bridge the research–practice gap. As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers have a critical role to play in promoting the structural and behavioural changes necessary to build the knowledge networks and new capabilities that enable an evidence ecosystem. In particular, this article makes a case for harnessing the relational nature of knowledge brokering and trialling new mechanisms for research–practitioner collaboration and evidence innovation. It is hoped that this article can serve as the foundation for a future research and practice agenda examining how knowledge brokering operates and where university‐produced research can best support evidence‐based reform.Points for practitionersAs the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers can encourage the cross‐boundary thinking, genuine partnerships, and new capabilities to support evidence‐based reform.The Australian Public Sector Reform agenda provides a unique opportunity to trial new mechanisms and approaches to expand understanding of how knowledge brokering operates in practice and the conditions that support successful research–practice collaboration.Mechanisms should be formal and accompanied by bureaucratic‐level support and incentives, providing them with the legitimacy needed to embed new mindsets, capabilities, and ways of working.A key consideration for public sector practitioners is how to establish arrangements and incentives that are mutually beneficial for researchers and practitioners alike and monitor the effectiveness of these initiatives over time.
期刊介绍:
Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.