jasdooit

By Rejoice Esi Asante (PhD)

Research involves discovering knowledge that benefits society. Although it has enabled the resolution of questions, addressed challenges, and enhanced understanding in various fields, while also driving economic growth through innovation, ensuring national security, and improving public health and well-being globally in developed nations, this is not the case for developing and underdeveloped countries.

The proof of new inventions, digital technologies, and sustainable methods, which boost productivity, competition, and human-machine cooperation, is evident in developed countries, as shown by research. These countries have seen economic expansion and innovation, driving wealth and development, and advancing industries with the help of highly skilled and competitive sectors along with digital evolution.

Only scientific knowledge, although significant, might not be sufficient to create a meaningful effect. At the same time, the influence of research and technology in developing regions faces various difficulties, such as facilitating commercial technology transfer, building essential human resources and expertise, and enacting social policies to address adverse effects on disadvantaged communities (International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNCTAD).

The application of research findings in decision-making through cooperative efforts for social investments has been promoted. This process includes the sharing of scientific evidence to grasp its impact on community welfare and support decisions grounded in evidence. Often, there is a gap between research and policy choices. Although researchers’ well-meaning efforts remain unused on shelves and in directories, there is no practical implementation in policies, which leads to societal harm.

A call to action, as stated by Wijesinghe (2020), involves researchers participating in the ‘science-policy interface,’ meaning they help convert scientific results into policies and practical actions that bring about beneficial changes for both people and the environment. Researchers are becoming more eager to conduct meaningful and well-structured studies, and to provide scientific recommendations actively to those making decisions.

The Development Impact West Africa (DIWA) recently held the 2025 impact summit in Accra, with an emphasis on promoting evidence-based policymaking and sustainable development across West Africa. Bringing together scholars and researchers, policymakers, and development professionals, DIWA has succeeded in converting research outcomes into real-world applications, impacting policy changes and enhancing the practice of relying on reliable evidence to guide the region’s future.

The agreement among attendees at the summit in August highlighted the importance of shifting research from evidence to impact, extending beyond academic circles to affect policy and societal matters, and creating connections between researchers and decision-makers. There was a recognized need for policy platforms based on evidence and for converting research into meaningful change. This article explores how research is being transformed to support impactful, positive decision-making and enhance societal well-being. It also looks at proposed methods to achieve this.

Research, Purposes and Benefits

The process of research involves a structured approach to exploring and examining information, with the aim of collecting and evaluating data to uncover new insights or enhance current understanding and theoretical frameworks. Typically, it refers to the pursuit of new knowledge, which may involve creating new ideas or building upon existing knowledge and theories, resulting in fresh perspectives (UIC, n/d).

The goal is to improve society by promoting understanding through the creation of scientific theories, concepts, and ideas, via different processes and by applying results to practical situations, leading to new research inquiries (DiscoverPhDs, 2020). Moreover, the aim of research is to generate knowledge, address issues, guide actions, expand theoretical frameworks, and acquire new abilities.

Transforming Research

To generate meaningful influence from research necessitates a transition from conventional academic investigation to practical, multi-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary methods that actively engages stakeholders and communities throughout the process, with the goal of promoting transformation in society towards sustainability and social equity.

It is achieved through the creation of knowledge, the development of practical solutions, and ensuring that research directly supports building a better, safer, and healthier future (DiscoverPhDs, 2020). It involves moving past merely generating knowledge to actively driving change via flexible approaches and a thorough grasp of the social and political environments where the research takes place.

Hahnel and Porter (2024) noted that the current attitudes toward research differ from those held a decade or even five years ago. The viewpoints they identified reflect changes in how individuals see themselves and their roles within the community. In addition to the influence of AI, which is also a topic of concern, the researchers found that the capacity to adapt and evolve is clearly evident across all aspects of research, such as open access, metrics, collaboration, and research security.

Beyond the transformation, research barriers continue to exist. Metrics are becoming more focused on comprehensive impact and inclusivity. The potential of AI to bring about change is significant, but bureaucracy and a lack of skills pose challenges to advancement. They also discovered that collaboration is growing, yet concerns regarding funding and security remain, with security and risk management requiring a strategic cultural shift.

Transformation: Evidence to Impact

Shifting research from evidence to real-world influence requires a deliberate approach to linking study results with practical societal advantages. This involves planning right from the beginning of a project, utilizing methods such as logic models or theories of change, establishing distinct cause-and-effect relationships between the research and its outcomes, and involving various stakeholders. The term “transformation” has become popular in scientific and political discussions. It is also now widely used in the expanding field of normative literature concerning sustainability (Hölscher et al. 2021).

In business research, for example, Fiedler et al. (2023) state that transformation is connected to the organizational concept of change. However, while the term ‘change’ refers to all kinds of modifications within an organization and includes adaptations at the micro-level, ‘transformation’ focuses on a shift in the overall business model or significant components of it, which can be viewed as a fundamental change in the firm’s environment that leads to changes within the organization.

Innovative research is defined by a clear intention to engage in order to drive change and to actively include stakeholders in the research process. Through this approach, transformative research produces socially beneficial knowledge essential for sustainable transitions.

Several organizations link people and groups to create, exchange, and apply evidence, similar to DIWA. These entities gather scholars, decision-makers, professionals, and financiers along with media personnel and research institutes and facilitators to aid in comprehending existing knowledge across different areas and to establish joint research initiatives that tackle unresolved issues.

Evidence-Based Practices / Outcomes

Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) involves combining various types of evidence, such as research and practical experience. According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2025), this approach supports making more informed and effective decisions by selecting dependable, credible solutions, rather than depending on old-fashioned assumptions, trends, or simple temporary fixes and inherent biases. This leads to a more robust foundation of knowledge, enhancing the credibility of the profession and giving professionals greater authority, which in turn increases their impact on other business leaders.

The approach involves leveraging the most current and reliable information from various sources to enhance decision-making. The four primary sources of evidence include scientific research and literature along with empirical studies, internal organizational or corporate data, the professional knowledge and insights of practitioners, and the values and concerns of stakeholders (CIPD, 2025; Boatman and Nemcova, 2025).

Rousseau and Haveb (2022) argue that Evidence-Based Change Management is the application of scientifically supported methods in overseeing planned organizational change, emphasizing two main ideas: first, that planned change has a higher chance of success when guided by science-based approaches, and second, that consistently utilizing four types of evidence (scientific, organizational, stakeholder, and practitioner experience) enhances the quality of decisions made during change initiatives, highlighting that high-quality evidence and practices can reshape the change process.

How to Make Decisions Based on Evidence

The CIPD (2025) emphasized a hands-on approach to making decisions based on evidence, such as examining existing research, gathering and analyzing organizational data, evaluating published findings, testing new methods, exchanging information, and most importantly, applying critical thinking.

The Institute outlined six steps: 1) questioning, which involves converting real-world issues or problems into clear, answerable questions; 2) gathering, meaning systematically searching for and obtaining the relevant evidence; 3) evaluating, which refers to critically assessing the reliability and applicability of the evidence; 4) synthesizing, meaning analyzing and combining the evidence; 5) implementing, which is integrating the evidence into the decision-making process; and 6) reviewing, which involves examining the results of the decision made. When carried out effectively, these steps can enhance the chances of achieving a positive result.

Titler (2008) outlined several strategies for encouraging the implementation of evidence-based practices from the viewpoints of researchers who produce knowledge, practitioners who apply evidence-based information, and individuals who act as intermediaries connecting knowledge creators with end users.

They noted that knowledge creation and distillation involve conducting research and then presenting key findings in the form of actionable products—like specific practice guidelines—thereby enhancing the chances that research evidence will be applied in real-world settings (Nieva et al., 2005). It is crucial that the knowledge distillation process be shaped and directed by end users to ensure that research results are put into practice.

The process of diffusion and spreading information entails collaborating with expert opinion leaders and organizations to share knowledge that can serve as a foundation for potential users (Nieva et al., 2005). These dissemination collaborations connect researchers with intermediaries who act as knowledge brokers and links to appropriate organizations. Intermediaries may include professional associations or cross-disciplinary knowledge transfer teams.

The last phase of the knowledge transfer process involves end users embracing, applying, and integrating new knowledge (Nieva et al., 2005). This phase centers on encouraging organizations, groups, and individuals to incorporate evidence-based research results and innovations into their regular work. Several implementation approaches involve employing change advocates within organizations who can tackle possible obstacles, as well as testing the changes with others.

In summary, it is crucial to emphasize the argument presented by Jessen et al. (2024) regarding the necessity to change perceptions about, and develop a new story explaining, the expected role of research in achieving a more sustainable path for societal development. Furthermore, both existing funding approaches and university education programs need to be adjusted to align with this revised perspective. Moreover, collaborations between research organizations and the non-academic sector should be enhanced.

Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).