Reporting on a study of knowledge brokers’ views on the attributes required to be good at their job, Denis Karcher and Chris Cvitanovic present four attributes and styles of working that underpin good knowledge brokering and suggest how they might be evaluated.

Bridging the gap between scientific research and policymaking is crucial for supporting evidence-informed decision-making. Knowledge brokers have emerged as a key strategy for supporting this process in a range of sectors and settings, acting as intermediaries who facilitate the exchange of knowledge between researchers and decision-makers.

despite growing recognition for knowledge brokers, it is still hard to say what qualities contribute to their success

However, despite growing recognition for knowledge brokers, it is still hard to say what qualities contribute to their success and how these can be meaningfully evaluated. In our recent study we sought answers to these questions from knowledge brokers themselves. In doing so, we produced valuable insights for enhancing the implementation of knowledge brokers in various fields.

What are the most important attributes of knowledge brokers?

The most important attributes of being a knowledge broker is the presence of highly developed interpersonal social competencies. While numerous were identified, the most highly ranked by our sample were:

• Seeing opportunities for collaboration: This was the highest-ranked attribute, emphasising the importance of identifying and leveraging collaborative opportunities.
• Being able to tailor communication for different audiences: Communication across boundaries is critical. Understanding the varying needs and languages of different audiences is key to science-policy exchange.
• Being a good listener and asking questions effectively: This skill is crucial for facilitating meaningful exchanges and understanding diverse perspectives.  It centred on the ability to be an effective listener and the unpretentiousness of not being scared to ask simple questions to find mutual understandings.
• Identifying shared interests: This attribute focused on the ability to recognise common goals among diverse academic and non-academic patterns to build a shared vision underpinned by strong, cooperative relationships.

Other valued attributes included being responsive, being respectful of diverse values/worldviews, being able to manage multiple accountabilities and the ability to get along with different personality types. Conversely, individualistic traits like being charismatic, willing to take risks, and being a role model were deemed less important.

There is no “one-size-fits-all” knowledge broker

Building on the above, we further found that the predominant attributes of knowledge brokers can take different forms. We identified different types of knowledge brokers and highlight that organisations might need knowledge brokers with complementary skill sets across different tasks and timelines. In our case study we found four distinct types of knowledge brokers, each with a uniquely weighted mix of attributes:

1. The Managers: These knowledge brokers prioritised professional attributes such as managing multiple accountabilities, being diplomatic, and demonstrating leadership. They are adept at making quick decisions and wielding authority when necessary.
2. The Proactivists: Characterised by personal traits, Proactivists prioritise being opportunistic, flexible, and open-minded. Their proactive nature helps them seize opportunities and adapt to changing circumstances.
3. The Creatives: These knowledge brokers emphasise task-related traits like creativity, passion, hard work, and goal orientation. They thrive in environments that support innovative and technical approaches.
4. The Trusted: For this group, interpersonal competencies are paramount. They rank trust, respect for differences, multitasking, and empathy highly, while finding less importance in getting along with different personalities and political awareness.

Can we evaluate person qualities?

Our findings underscore the need for more formalised roles and clearer evaluation methods for knowledge brokers. Current evaluation practices often focus on immediate delivery and engagement, but there is a clear need to consider long-term impacts and value addition. Particularly, direct attribution of knowledge brokers engagement to certain outcomes, the design of projects, relationship building, and end-user capacity are currently neglected aspects of understanding the contributions made by knowledge brokers.

There is also a clear lack of recognition of the time and individual effort required in preparing for and engaging with different research and policy communities.

There is also a clear lack of recognition of the time and individual effort required in preparing for and engaging with different research and policy communities. For example, we highlight the value of proactivity that could be taken more into account when evaluating outcomes, for example through counterfactuals (what if there had not been a knowledge broker?). By incorporating measures of value addition, long-term impacts, knowledge management, knowledge flows, and capacity building, evaluations can become more relevant to the practical realities of knowledge brokering.

Knowledge brokers remain a nascent profession and the formalisation and optimisation of their role in science systems is ongoing. Effective knowledge brokering requires nuanced interpersonal competencies, not just simply being “good networker”. These competencies are a key asset for knowledge brokers, but to date their plausible contribution to long-term impact and value addition is not sufficiently accounted for. To get the most from knowledge brokers, organisations and universities should formalise boundary roles with clearer language, expectations, and evaluation criteria. By adopting more comprehensive evaluation methods, we can better capture the true impact of knowledge brokers and support their career progression, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of evidence-informed decision-making.

This post draws on the authors’ paper, Key attributes for effective knowledge brokering at the interface of environmental science and management, published in Sustainability Science.

The content generated on this blog is for information purposes only. This Article gives the views and opinions of the authors and does not reflect the views and opinions of the Impact of Social Science blog (the blog), nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science. Please review our comments policy if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image Credit: OSABEE on Shutterstock.