Joann Cattlin, J. and Given, L.M. (2024) Information relations for social change: exploring the information behaviour of academics undertaking impact work. Information Research. pp 230-245. https://doi.org/10.47989/ir292824
Abstract
Introduction. This paper examines academics’ information behaviour in undertaking research for societal impact. It explores how researcher-stakeholder relationships provide sites of information exchange where academics develop skills and knowledge needed to undertake impact work.
Method. This qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with 27 academics at 18 institutions across Australia. Participants were recruited across disciplines and at various career stages.
Analysis. Constructivist grounded theory was used as a methodology, with Fiske’s Relational Models Theory as a framework for analysis.
Results. Results show that information behaviours relating to impact work were enacted within relationships with industry, community, and government partners. These relationships were characterised by four elements: curiosity, reciprocity, trust, and engagement.
Conclusion. The paper presents a model of Relational-Informational Impact Practice to guide individual researchers’ information behaviours and to inform university support programs for researchers engaged in societal impact work. The model outlines the interplay between curiosity, reciprocity, trust, and engagement, and impact-relevant information behaviours, such as information needs identification, sharing practices, and serendipity.
Captured my eye immediately in the abstract: “It explores how researcher-stakeholder relationships provide sites of information exchange where academics develop skills and knowledge needed to undertake impact work.” This paper is about information behaviour. I think about people and animals having behaviours but not information. This is a new concept for me and its interesting to see it through a knowledge mobilization lens speaking about researcher-stakeholder relationships. And to have common characteristics of “curiosity, reciprocity, trust, and engagement” which also are characteristics of knowledge mobilization. I guess one can say that knowledge mobilization is mediated by information behaviours.
This makes sense since it is through relationships (research-stakeholder) that information is exchanged. Check back on a long-ago journal club about knowledge mobilization and ignorance mobilization. Bottom line is knowledge mobilization is like end of grant KT where we are disseminating knowledge to others. Ignorance mobilization is integrated KT where we are collaborating to try to find answers to a question we have asked but not yet answered. Since we don’t know the answer we are in “ignorance”. Working together to find an answer is ignorance mobilization. In both of these information has behaviours but sometimes it is information we know and sometimes it is information about something we don’t know.
The paper describes these “relationships as generative information environments”. These relationships create “conditions necessary for individuals to understand and interact with others, and by introducing information behaviour as the process of exchange.”
And another key characteristic of these relationships is serendipity. As much as we try to mobilize knowledge much of the time we are creating relationships to maximize the chances that serendipity can happen. These relationships are supported by information exchange and information behaviours. And when we do this, sometimes serendipity happens.
Questions for brokers
- Ignorance mobilization: is this really a thing?
- Think of a knowledge mobilization relationship you are familiar with. How does it rank on curiosity, reciprocity, trust, and engagement?
- What are doing to create spaces where serendipity happens?
Research Impact Canada is producing this journal club series to make evidence on knowledge mobilization more accessible to knowledge brokers and to facilitate discussion about research on knowledge mobilization. It is designed for knowledge brokers and other parties interested in knowledge mobilization.