Aim: Policymaking decisions are often uninformed by research and research is rarely influenced by policymakers. To bridge this ‘know-do’ gap, a boundary-spanning knowledge mobilisation (KM) team was created by embedding researchers-in-residence and local policymakers into each other’s organisations. Through increasing the two-way flow of knowledge via social contact, KM team members fostered collaborations and the sharing of ‘mindlines’, aiming to generate more relevant research bids and research-informed decision-making. This paper describes the activities of the KM team, types of knowledge and how that knowledge was exchanged to influence mindlines. Discussion: KM team activities were classified into: relational, dissemination, transferable skills, evaluation, research and awareness raising. Knowledge available included: profession specific (for example, research methods, healthcare landscape), insider (for example, relational, organisation and experiential) and KM theory and practice. KM team members brokered relationships through conversations interweaving different types of knowledge, particularly organisational and relational. Academics were interested in policymakers’ knowledge of healthcare policy and the commissioning landscape. More than research results, policymakers valued researchers’ methodological knowledge. Both groups appreciated each other as ‘critical friends’. Conclusion: To increase research impact, ‘expertise into practice’ could be leveraged, specifically researchers’ critical thinking and research methodology skills. As policymakers’ expertise into practice also bridges the know-do gap, future impact models could focus less on evidence into practice and more on fostering this mutual flow of expertise. Embedded knowledge brokers from the two communities working in teams can influence the mindlines of both. These ambassadors can create improvements in ‘inter-cultural competence’ to draw academia and policymaking closer.

中文翻译：

---

知识经纪人还是关系经纪人？嵌入式知识动员团队的作用

目标：政策制定者的决策往往不受研究的影响，而且研究很少受到政策制定者的影响。为了弥合这种“知识”差距，通过将驻地研究人员和当地政策制定者嵌入彼此的组织中，创建了一个跨越边界的知识动员 (KM) 团队。通过社会接触增加知识的双向流动，知识管理团队成员促进了合作和“思维方式”的共享，旨在产生更多相关的研究投标和研究知情决策。本文描述了知识管理团队的活动、知识类型以及如何交换知识以影响思维导图。讨论：知识管理团队活动分为：关系、传播、可转移技能、评估、研究和提高认识。可用知识包括：特定专业（例如，研究方法、医疗保健景观）、内部人员（例如，关系、组织和经验）以及 KM 理论和实践。知识管理团队成员通过对话交织不同类型的知识，尤其是组织和关系知识，来促成关系。学者们对决策者对医疗保健政策和委托环境的了解感兴趣。政策制定者比研究成果更看重研究人员的方法学知识。两组都将对方视为“批判性朋友”。结论：为了增加研究影响，可以利用“将专业知识转化为实践”，特别是研究人员的批判性思维和研究方法技能。由于政策制定者在实践中的专业知识也弥合了知识差距，未来的影响模型可以少关注实践中的证据，而更多地关注促进这种专业知识的相互流动。来自两个社区的嵌入式知识经纪人团队合作可以影响双方的思维方式。这些大使可以提高“跨文化能力”，以拉近学术界和政策制定的距离。