Abstract
Background: Our interdisciplinary team initiated a project to inform the COVID-19 vaccination programme. We developed a novel research co-creation approach to share emerging findings with government.
Aims and objectives: We critically assess the ‘Functional Dialogue’ (FD) programme for future research translation practices in time-limited policy-making scenarios. We identify what factors helped us to put the FDs together and consider their effects on all aspects of the research programme. We draw out key moments of impact, weaknesses and challenges and identify how future FDs might be enhanced.
Methods: Between January 2021 and June 2022, we conducted 14 FDs with state and federal government, exploring attendees’ attitudes, beliefs, experiences, roles and observations regarding our research. FDs and research team debriefs were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.
Findings: FD processes proved invaluable to the timeliness, impact and flow of our research project by creating systems that helped to bridge the evidence–policy gap. Relationships and reciprocity helped, but other professional commitments of our government partners posed challenges and produced fluctuating engagement. FDs built the capacity of the research team, strengthening communication skills and creating opportunities to contribute to pandemic policies.
Discussion and conclusion: We struggled to quantify the impact of FDs on policy decisions due to the ethical requirements of academic research, barriers for policy makers in isolating and/or acknowledging impact, and the collaborative nature of dialogue. Nevertheless, the structures of knowledge transfer that we foresaw as necessary to ensure impact became the central plank of the project’s broader success.
Aims and objectives: We critically assess the ‘Functional Dialogue’ (FD) programme for future research translation practices in time-limited policy-making scenarios. We identify what factors helped us to put the FDs together and consider their effects on all aspects of the research programme. We draw out key moments of impact, weaknesses and challenges and identify how future FDs might be enhanced.
Methods: Between January 2021 and June 2022, we conducted 14 FDs with state and federal government, exploring attendees’ attitudes, beliefs, experiences, roles and observations regarding our research. FDs and research team debriefs were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.
Findings: FD processes proved invaluable to the timeliness, impact and flow of our research project by creating systems that helped to bridge the evidence–policy gap. Relationships and reciprocity helped, but other professional commitments of our government partners posed challenges and produced fluctuating engagement. FDs built the capacity of the research team, strengthening communication skills and creating opportunities to contribute to pandemic policies.
Discussion and conclusion: We struggled to quantify the impact of FDs on policy decisions due to the ethical requirements of academic research, barriers for policy makers in isolating and/or acknowledging impact, and the collaborative nature of dialogue. Nevertheless, the structures of knowledge transfer that we foresaw as necessary to ensure impact became the central plank of the project’s broader success.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Evidence and Policy |
| Early online date | 11 Nov 2024 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 11 Nov 2024 |
