Research about when, why, and how evidence is used identifies the importance of social interactions and organizational norms that support evidence use. Community dissonance theory , which highlights how researchers, practitioners, and policymakers work within different professional and institutional cultures, provides a helpful frame when thinking about the influence of social and organizational culture on the use of evidence. Karen Bogenschneider and her team use the metaphor of an archipelago of islands: each island has its own language, norms, processes, timelines, and expectations. Unless we understand how the islands are different, we can’t develop effective strategies to bring research, policy, and practice together.
As travelers know, your experience in another country will be enhanced if you learn about the facets of local culture: the language, customs, beliefs, and values of the people you meet in the places you go. Relatedly, if researchers focus only on the translation of research, without deeper engagement with the contexts and situations in which it will be used, we may miss important concepts and nuances. For researchers aiming to generate evidence to inform policy and practice, adopting this perspective may help shift energy towards creating conditions that support evidence use.
Shifting (PDF) from a focus on one-way dissemination of evidence to adopting more relational approaches allows research to adopt more holistic perspectives and broaden efforts to include the people and organizations who will use their work. A relational approach requires identifying ways for researchers and intended users to work together to identify what questions to ask and opportunities to conduct work “at the boundaries ” that create separation between research and its use. OPRE has been investing in efforts to do just this, from work on joint research planning, focusing on more participatory approaches, the use of continuous quality improvement with programs, and funding research-practice partnerships.
Existing organizational structures can strongly influence meaningful connections between evidence and practice. This shapes how evidence--including research--informs our work . Some scholars have borrowed an idea from organizational psychology called the absorptive capacity of organizations, which is about how organizations “recognize new information, assimilate it, and apply it as part of organizational routines and policies.”
Learning organizations prioritize seeking new knowledge and establishing ways to integrate new information into how they do their work. Research needs to better understand how organizations seek and value external knowledge and how those conditions that support evidence use can be facilitated. For example, social network analysis of research use in educational settings has highlighted the influence of social networks over individuals on the exchange and use of information, including research . What if we, as researchers, started by centering the intended users of our work and their organizations? This could allow us to understand when, why, and how policymakers and practitioners use evidence, and to develop conditions that facilitate evidence use.
A Framework for Evidence Capacity
The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act (PDF) of 2018 recognizes that an agency’s evidence culture and evidence infrastructure are crucial to identifying the right questions to ask and using the resulting evidence. As one example, the Evidence Act requires agencies to do annual evidence capacity assessments . In line with these efforts, OPRE’s ACF Evidence Capacity Support project turned to the literature to develop a framework that uses what researchers know about evidence use to think about ACF’s capacity to be a learning organization with a culture of continuous improvement. Informed by evidence, this framework contains both the relational and organizational factors supporting evidence use.
This evidence capacity framework highlights the important role of engagement, the systems and processes that facilitate collaboration, to advance evidence use. This approach to engagement recognizes the importance of not only dissemination--which is often the focus of evidence-use efforts--but also of the individual and interpersonal components of engagement. It is important to consider how staff receive and share information (i.e. internal engagement) and how an organization’s external relationships enable consultation and information sharing (i.e. external engagement).
Further, the framework highlights the critical role of organizational evidence infrastructure: the organizational tools, resources, routines, and processes that enable the use of evidence. Evidence infrastructure importantly removes obstacles associated with building and using evidence. With strong infrastructure organizations are more likely to have valid sources of information that help decision makers navigate key areas of program planning and administration. Each element of the evidence infrastructure contributes important perspectives:
- Tools such as program logic models, learning agendas, and needs assessments that take stock of what we know and what we still need to learn.
- Data infrastructure and technology so our sources of data are high quality, easy to access and analyze, and properly protected.
- Performance Monitoring and Improvement to routinely use data to track progress, identify challenges, and inform strategies for improvement
- Program Evaluation to conduct systematic studies that contribute to evidence-informed decision making.
Organizational models to support evidence use are beginning to emerge, but few have been clearly articulated or evaluated . This evidence capacity framework can help us clearly communicate the intent of our work to support evidence-informed decision-making, hypothesize outcomes of OPRE’s evidence activities, and take stock of our own effectiveness. Like a travel guidebook that informs us on the language, culture, and processes of policymakers and practitioners, we hope the evidence capacity framework can help ACF continue to invest in ways that facilitate evidence use. At the same time, we can learn more about these concepts and structures, study their effectiveness, and feed that knowledge back into organizational systems and interventions.
Lauren Supplee is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning, Research, and Evaluation at the Administration for Children and Families (ACF).
Nicole Deterding is Team Lead for Program Office Support in OPRE's Division of Data and Improvement.