Skip to main content

Table 3 Empirical details about partnership initiation evaluated and reported in each review

From: Conceptualising the initiation of researcher and research user partnerships: a meta-narrative review

Narratives Team initiation Stakeholder engagement IKT partnerships Action research Shared mental models Knowledge transfer
Reference number [37] [33] [32] [9] [36] [31] [43] [35] [44] [8] [30] [39] [41] [38] [42] [40] [34]
 Defining and describing the problem and research question x x x   x x x   x   x x   x    
 Setting priorities and/or expectations; conducting needs assessment x   x x x   x x x    x     x  
 Identifying stakeholders and opportunities to build partnerships (internal and external opportunities) x        x    x x    x   
 Creating common goals with common outcomes, objectives, memorandum of understanding, agreement, operating norms x   x x   x x   x x x x x x    
 Establishing pre-existing resources that could be used or acquired by the partners to build the project x    x x     x   x      x  
 Developing risks and benefits of the partnership x                 
 Considering inequalities in power x       x   x        x  
 Establishing communication methods such as evidence briefs, web portals, social media, new tools and technologies     x   x       x    x   x
 Receiving training and learning   x   x   x    x    x    x   
 Applying for funding     x    x   x         
 Planning to conduct joint research     x x     x     x x    
 Establishing committees, boards, or working groups     x              
 Creating and transferring of organisational knowledge occurs through processes of conversion (i.e. tacit to formal) and assimilation, and the transfer from individual to collective                 x  
 Mobilising knowledge/change agents      x            x  
 Building organisational structures aligned with strategy and external context x     x        x     x  
 Sense of ownership of research or output x   x   x x x   x     x   x   
 Commitment to partnership x    x    x   x x   x    x   
 Formal training and development and the acquisition of team members’ knowledge and skills x         x      x x   
 Positive attitude towards listening, learning, adapting and training   x   x   x        x   x   
 Time for team meetings for information sharing by using all-day conference, etc.       x       x   x x   
 Multiple and varied opportunities for interaction     x              
 Phased approach to developing shared language     x      x         
 Support from facilitators, champions, boundary, spanners; advisory board x x   x x    x x        x  
 Clear and agreed upon goals, roles, expectations and vision x    x x x x   x   x x x    x  
 Dedicated funding     x      x   x x      
 Pre-existing relationships between researchers and research users     x      x x        
 Policy-makers with a research background and researchers skilled in policy-making      x             
 Supportive policy framework or network structure/ties for researchers and research users to create knowledge and implementing research results    x x x    x x       x   x
 Team members from the community       x    x   x x      
 Positive personality of the action researcher        x           
 Time for learning and training, developing relationships, building trust and sustaining intervention   x   x    x x x   x x   x x   
 Performance rewards awarded to individuals rather than groups                x   
 Performance feedback that mixed individual with group level feedback                x   
 No understanding and/or differing interpretations of the institutional and federal Institutional Review Board regulations   x       x       x    
 Imbalance between rigor of academic preferred research designs and incorporating of community preferences        x x x    x      
 No stakeholder engagement x x      x x       x    
 different needs and priorities x x      x x x         
 No skill in understanding of partnership process     x     x          
 Negative attitude about researchers or the value of research     x    x   x    x      
 Goals, roles and expectations were not clear x    x    x   x    x    x   
 No incentives to participate     x         x      
 No funding or infrastructure of partnership x    x     x x    x   x    
 Little continuity of involvement due to staff turnover     x     x     x      
 Limited interaction due to geographic distance   x   x              
 Community resistance          x x        
 Issues of power x x      x   x    x   x    
 Conflict of interest   x           x      
 Negative personality of the action researcher        x           
 No guidance of initiation of partnerships in literature   x x     x x       x    
 Empowerment of research users    x     x x x x   x      
 Develop research questions        x     x x   x    
 Develop a clear understanding of the expectations of different partners x   x          x      
 If research users understand research, they grow to value it, it is more relevant and easier to disseminate and implement, aids in the translation and interpretation of findings which increases actionability   x x x    x     x x x x    x
 Enhanced mutual understanding of process, including language, work style, needs and constraints, research     x    x        x    
 Strengthened relationship, trust and goodwill   x   x       x   x   x    
 Emergence of community leaders     x              
 Agenda building        x     x x     x  
 Builds strengths and resources within the community        x   x x x x      
 Increase trust and respect, minimise fear     x     x x x   x   x   x  
 Compliance and accountability x x x    x x x x