Meeting in the middle: building a knowledge partnership between academia and government

A growing body of literature on ‘university-industry collaboration’ (UIC) describes a broad range of interactions between the higher education system with industry and government (Nyman 2015). The barriers and... [ view full abstract ]

A growing body of literature on ‘university-industry collaboration’ (UIC) describes a broad range of interactions between the higher education system with industry and government (Nyman 2015).
The barriers and impediments to collaboration between universities, businesses and governments are well known ( for example, Ankrah & Al-Tabbaa, 2015). According to Nyman (2015), the challenge becomes to provide ‘underlying platforms’ to support collaboration, recognising they can better and more flexibly adapt to the dynamics of markets (for our purposes, policy problems and issues), new information and new participants. Indeed, he argues the goal is not for collaborations to ‘solidify’, but to support them so they are able to ‘endure and evolve’.
This paper analyses the role of an ‘underlying platform’ within a university - the Policy Innovation Hub – to overcome the cultural difference between academia and practice to support government decision-making in a complex and fast moving policy area in real time. The translation and mediation role between government and the tertiary sector is increasingly seen as a specialised role and important in increasing and demonstrating impact.
In early 2016, the Queensland Department of the Premier and Cabinet commissioned the Policy Innovation Hub at Griffith University to enter into a knowledge partnership to support the newly formed Social Cohesion Implementation Committee. The Committee’s role was to develop programs and initiatives to increase social cohesion to counter violent extremism. The Queensland Government sought the partnership because it was a new and fast moving policy area with limited expertise existing within government and which needed a cross disciplinary approach from criminal studies, through to psychology, education, media and place based approaches to address the issue.
The Policy Innovation Hub pulled together a team of 21 researchers to produce evidence detailing the literature, theory and initiatives in the areas of social cohesion, radicalisation and extremism as requested. The Hub was responsible for client management with the Department of the Premier and Cabinet and ensuring the contribution of researchers met timelines and was ‘decision-ready’ for government.
The research is significant because it identifies the skills needed to bridge the divide between academia and practice and describes how a mediating organisation can bring these skills to a university environment. The Policy Innovation Hub bridged the divide by bringing both considerable expertise in public administration and policy development as well as in the practice of academic research.
The research questions to underpin the paper are:
• Can an intermediary organisation overcome the cultural differences between academia and practice?
• Whether the client believed this model added value and made a significant contribution to their decision-making?
There were a number of outcomes from the project to be reported in the paper and they include the transition of the relationship with practitioners from static to dynamic as researchers were consulted and provided evidence at critical junctions; the embedding of the research team in government decision-making processes allowing academic researchers to sit in the institutional heart of government; and, rapid assimilation of knowledge for practitioners.