Research for impact: three keys for research implementation

Figures & data

Figure 1. Logic model. Source: Authors.

Figure 2. Feedback loop. Source: Authors.

Figure 3. Pathway to Impact step diagram. Source: Authors.

Figure 4. Pathway to Impact and implementation outcomes. Source: Authors.

Figure 5. Activity breakdown, activity categories, and implementation outcomes. Source: Authors.

Table 1. Research processes used to develop the IEE Standards.

Process step	Process	Purpose
1	Customer empathy mapping	Engage research end-users extremely early in the research design to understand and identify their specific needs concerning community engagement practice.
2	Literature review	Identify and categorize key framework characteristics, based on the academic, and practice literature.
3	Qualitative interviews	Obtain deep, opinion leader insights into best practice community engagement, involving industry partner experts as co-researchers to gather interview data
4	Industry workshops	Involve a cross-section of the entire infrastructure sector value-chain of professionals (e.g. from policy to finance to construction to delivery) in developing the draft Standards to ensure issues captured through the literature review and expert interviews reflected the lived experience in field.
5	Industry briefings	Sense-check of next iteration of Standards with industry to inform face validity, Standards’ comprehensiveness, and utility.
6	Co-production	Allow multiple review rounds with industry partners to ensure the final version of the Standards met the needs identified in Process Step 1.

Table

Implementation outcome	Process/Activities
Source of the framework perceived as legitimate	Included industry partner in co-design process (16) Industry workshops with >150 professionals providing input into IEE Standards development (7) Iterative process to ensure industry’s ongoing involvement, from the design phase (17) Industry partner involved in data collection and analysis (24) Partners co-facilitate industry workshops (11)
Strong perception of framework quality and validity including: Multiple sources of evidence used Credibility of developers of evidence Transparency of process to develop evidence	Literature review informed first draft of standards (1) Working group reviewed literature review (2) Research process communicated early to industry prior to research commencing, through workshops, events and industry e-newsletter (14) Extensive industry involvement through qualitative interviews and workshops (4,5,7) Partnered with industry organisations to host workshops; increased credibility of research (8) Iterative process to ensure industry’s ongoing involvement, from the design phase (17) Partners co-facilitate industry workshops (11)
Positive perception of framework design and packaging	Customer empathy workshop held prior to research commencement to understand how the framework would be used in everyday practice, including design and packaging advice (26) Industry partner Working Group review and ‘sense check’ research regularly (23) Co-location of researcher at industry partner to provide ongoing formal and informal staff input (22) Included industry partner in co-design process (16)
Adaptable within a local context and across multiple locations	Industry workshops to define/refine the core IEE Standards and to understand their potential use (19) Standards and tools revised and adapted, based on industry feedback to meet needs of diverse sectors. (20) Involved non-engagement professional field, to ensure accessibility and relevance (5) Iterative process ensured the framework design met end-users’ needs (18)
Ability to test and pilot	Iterative process that allowed plenty of opportunity for testing and refinement (17)
Perceived ease of implementation	Involved non-engagement professional field, to ensure accessibility and relevance (5) Balance robustness and accessibility/ease-of-use of the IEE Standards through iterative process (17)
Positive perception of advantage of framework implementation	Involved non-engagement professionals field, to ensure accessibility and relevance (5)
Political directives/mandates to implement framework.	Literature review incorporated relevant government documents and policies (3) Workshops hosted and attended by key government departments and representatives (9)
Community needs prioritised	Interviewed Community members during the development of the IEE Standards development. (6) Research approach refined so community reference groups involved (6)
Cosmopolitism encouraged	Industry workshops included time for participants to network (10)
Social Capital built including Supporting organisations to network externally Supporting active participation in professional groups	Research design process involved a substantial cross-section of the entire infrastructure industry, including government, private sector and civil society groups working in a variety of sectors such as water, roads and rail (21) Workshops involved range of >150 professionals from different sectors and at different career stages (7) Industry workshops included time for participants to network (10)
Competitive peer pressure applied	Workshops hosted by industry partners, demonstrating their support for the research (8) Workshops introduced by senior industry leaders and co-facilitated by research partners (25) Workshops involved range of >150 professionals from different sectors and at different career stages (7)
Cohesive team of stakeholders involved in implementation engaged early	Workshops involved range of >150 professionals from different sectors and at different career stages (7) Workshops allowed time for implementation discussion and what that might involve (12) Presentations at industry conferences throughout both during the framework development and at completion of phase one (15)
Expert opinion leaders and peer opinion leaders – influence attitudes towards the framework (through representativeness and credibility)	Expert and ‘peer’ opinion leaders invited to participate in workshops (13) Expert opinion leaders formally interviewed (4) Joint industry conference presentations with co-production partner (25)
Champions support implementation of the framework	Working Group within main industry partner demonstrated commitment to the research (23) Joint presentation and co-facilitation of conference sessions with industry partners (25)
Receptive implementation climate	Workshops hosted and attended by key government departments and representatives (9)
Framework compatible with existing organisational systems/processes	Interviews with non-community engagement professionals to understand work-flows and how to, and what would, support their work (5) Workshops allowed time for implementation discussion and what that might involve (12)
Perceived need for change	Presentations at industry conferences throughout both during the framework development and at completion of phase one (15) Co-facilitation of conference sessions with industry partners (25)
Positive perception of importance of implementing framework	Presentations at industry conferences throughout both during the framework development and at completion of phase one (15) Co-facilitation of conference sessions with industry partners (25)
Positive perceptions of advantage of framework development	Presentations at industry conferences throughout both during the framework development and at completion of phase one (15) Co-facilitation of conference sessions with industry partners (25)
Appropriate individuals involved in the implementation	Research design process involved a substantial cross-section of the entire infrastructure industry, including government, private sector and civil society groups working in a variety of sectors such as water, roads and rail (7).