Skip to main content

Table 2 Distribution of responses for perceptions of facilitators and barriers to engagement

From: Factors affecting engagement between academic faculty and decision-makers: learnings and priorities for a school of public health

Factor Survey phrasing Facilitator n (%) Barrier n (%) Both n (%) Neither n (%)
Individual characteristics
 Experiential knowledge “Previous professional/practical experience in a decision-making environment” 115 (55) 20 (10) 6 (3) 70 (33)
 Career stage “Stage I am at in my professional career” 104 (49) 47 (22) 22 (10) 38 (18)
 Faculty position “My (academic or administrative) role/position at JHSPH” 114 (54) 27 (13) 23 (11) 47 (22)
 KT skills “Communication/knowledge translation/advocacy skills” 135 (64) 27 (13) 19 (9) 30 (14)
Institutional environment
 Departmental reimbursement “Reimbursement by my department of costs incurred as a result of engagement” 41 (19) 33 (16) 2 (1) 135 (64)
 Academic incentives “Academic incentives (e.g. contribution to promotion and tenure) for engaging with decision-makers on research results/priorities etc.” 73 (35) 39 (19) 13 (6) 86 (41)
 Workplace location “Geographic location of my workplace” 99 (47) 31 (15) 18 (9) 63 (30)
 Departmental culture “Culture of pursuing policy- and/or practice- relevant research in my department” 116 (55) 29 (14) 11 (5) 55 (26)
 Non-financial support “Support (non-financial) from my supervisor/department” 122 (58) 27 (13) 13 (6) 49 (23)
 Dedicated time “Ability to carve out dedicated time for engagement with decision-makers” 65 (31) 90 (43) 20 (10) 36 (17)
 Institutional affiliation “Being affiliated with JHSPH (e.g. implied credibility)” 164 (78) 2 (1) 27 (13) 18 (9)
Relational dynamics
 Personal networks “My own pre-existing relationships/networks” 139 (66) 17 (8) 10 (5) 45 (21)
 Peer introductions “Introduction to decision-makers by colleagues who have relevant relationships/networks” 164 (78) 7 (3) 8 (4) 32 (15)
 Network culture “Culture of policy engagement amongst my professional network outside the SPH” 126 (60) 12 (6) 9 (4) 64 (30)
 Peer skills “Support from colleagues with communication/knowledge translation/advocacy skills” 130 (62) 12 (6) 8 (4) 61 (29)
Research focus
 Research relevance “Relevance of my research to pertinent policy issues” 164 (78) 5 (2) 23 (11) 19 (9)
 Research implications “Inclusion of contextual, economic or implementation-related implications of my research” 130 (62) 7 (3) 14 (7) 60 (28)
Funder policies
 External funding “Financial support/compensation from external sources (funders) for engagement” 91 (43) 24 (11) 38 (18) 58 (28)
 Funder requirements “Requirements from funders regarding dissemination and policy engagement (e.g. lobbying restrictions, dissemination beyond publications, etc.)” 73 (35) 14 (7) 23 (11) 101 (48)