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

NarrativesTeam initiationStakeholder engagementIKT partnershipsAction researchShared mental modelsKnowledge 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 questionxxx xxx x xx x   
 Setting priorities and/or expectations; conducting needs assessmentx xxx xxx  x   x 
 Identifying stakeholders and opportunities to build partnerships (internal and external opportunities)x      x  xx  x  
 Creating common goals with common outcomes, objectives, memorandum of understanding, agreement, operating normsx xx xx xxxxxx   
 Establishing pre-existing resources that could be used or acquired by the partners to build the projectx  xx   x x    x 
 Developing risks and benefits of the partnershipx                
 Considering inequalities in powerx     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   xx   x   xx   
 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 contextx   x      x   x 
 Sense of ownership of research or outputx x xxx x   x x  
 Commitment to partnershipx  x  x xx x  x  
 Formal training and development and the acquisition of team members’ knowledge and skillsx       x    xx  
 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 xx  
 Multiple and varied opportunities for interaction   x             
 Phased approach to developing shared language   x    x        
 Support from facilitators, champions, boundary, spanners; advisory boardxx xx  xx      x 
 Clear and agreed upon goals, roles, expectations and visionx  xxxx x xxx  x 
 Dedicated funding   x    x xx     
 Pre-existing relationships between researchers and research users   x    xx       
 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  xxx  xx     x x
 Team members from the community     x  x xx     
 Positive personality of the action researcher      x          
 Time for learning and training, developing relationships, building trust and sustaining intervention x x  xxx xx xx  
 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      xxx  x     
 No stakeholder engagementxx    xx     x   
 different needs and prioritiesxx    xxx        
 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 clearx  x  x x  x  x  
 No incentives to participate   x       x     
 No funding or infrastructure of partnershipx  x   xx  x x   
 Little continuity of involvement due to staff turnover   x   x   x     
 Limited interaction due to geographic distance x x             
 Community resistance        xx       
 Issues of powerxx    x x  x x   
 Conflict of interest x         x     
 Negative personality of the action researcher      x          
 No guidance of initiation of partnerships in literature xx   xx     x   
 Empowerment of research users  x   xxxx x     
 Develop research questions      x   xx x   
 Develop a clear understanding of the expectations of different partnersx 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 xxx  x   xxxx  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   xx   x 
 Builds strengths and resources within the community      x xxxx     
 Increase trust and respect, minimise fear   x   xxx x x x 
 Compliance and accountabilityxxx  xxxx