Here, Dr. Jennifer Jennings and Ms. Jessica Carlson offer suggestions for the actions that scholars and policy practitioners can take – both separately and jointly – to produce knowledge pertinent to the identified priorities
Ideas for bridging the academic policy divide
In a prior Open Access Government article, Dr. Jennifer Jennings (a professor at the University of Alberta) and Ms. Jessica Carlson (a recent Doctorate of Business Administration graduate and policy professional in the Government of Alberta) identified several policy-oriented priorities at the nexus of gender and entrepreneurship. In this follow-up article, they offer suggestions for the actions that scholars and policy practitioners can take – both separately and jointly – to produce knowledge pertinent to the identified priorities.
Converging interests between policymakers and academics
Although policy and academe have long been viewed as ‘worlds apart,’ Carlson and Jennings have noticed a growing convergence of interests between the two domains. Policymakers, for instance, are increasingly recognizing the opportunities of inclusive economic development and are keen to turn to academic information that can help guide policy formation to achieve these multiple objectives.
Reciprocally, academics are increasingly embracing a mindset consistent with what has been called the ‘responsibility turn’. Central to this mindset is the acknowledgement that one of a university professor’s key roles as a public servant is to produce scientific knowledge that can help address the world’s most pressing problems.
Jennings and Carlson have observed the converging interests of policy practitioners and academic researchers not only in regards to entrepreneurship in general, but also at the intersection of gender and entrepreneurship in particular. That being said, they are also aware of the divergent objectives and practices valued within policy versus academic circles, which can create challenges for bridging the divide between the two realms.
Divergent approaches that create bridging challenges
Consider the characteristics of scholarly research that are valued by policy practitioners. As summarized within a forthcoming article by Carlson and Jennings, policy professionals value information that is:
- practical (i.e., findings that can be implemented to help solve an identifiable problem)
- accessible (i.e., information that is easy to obtain and understand)
- credible (i.e., work that is transparent about any influencing factors)
- complex (i.e., research that accounts for multiple perspectives and stakeholders)
- responsive (i.e., information that is provided in a timely manner and reflects different circumstances and evolving needs)
In sharp contrast to many of these criteria, the prevailing reward system across many academic disciplines continues to grant greater prestige to research that addresses theoretical problems, typically from a single overarching perspective and in a manner that is comprehensible primarily (if not solely) by specialists in the domain. Moreover, due to the highly-rigorous review process in place at many elite academic journals, scholarly work often takes several years to be published.
Despite these divergences, Jennings and Carlson believe that there are numerous actions that can be taken – by both parties – to generate academic research that has a greater likelihood of being accessed, appreciated, and acted upon by those responsible for developing policy related to gender and entrepreneurship.
Recommendations for independent actions by policy practitioners
Carlson and Jennings have identified several actions that policy-practitioners can take to help in identifying, producing, and using academic research in policy formulation. The following suggestions relate to communicating policy priorities, accessing quality information, and revisiting organizational processes.
Providing leadership in terms of communicating policy priorities
There are opportunities for policy practitioners to proactively identify and communicate what type of information they need from academic research and why. Given that policy practitioners are immersed in policy issues, they are uniquely positioned to voice their perspectives on both current and future needs. By proactively identifying and communicating policy issues, policy-practitioners can support academics in producing relevant information. In health-related domains, for instance, many collaborative structures and processes have already been created, which serve as conduits for policy professionals to provide input on directions for future academic investigation. Carlson and Jennings encourage the creation of similar initiatives pertaining to research on gender and entrepreneurship.
Providing leadership in terms of accessing quality information
In addition to providing a leadership role in identifying and communicating policy priorities, there is also a need for policy-practitioners to provide leadership with respect to accessing quality information. Because policy practitioners are fundamentally knowledge workers, ongoing personal and professional development is critical. At present, policy practitioners are typically supported in professional development based on competencies and skills such as leadership/ management, stakeholder relations, governance, and project management (among others). Jennings and Carlson suggest that increased attention to knowledge areas can and should also be supported. More specifically, they encourage policy professionals to ask for content-focused courses focused upon gender and entrepreneurship (and other topics of socioeconomic significance) to be delivered through executive education programs.
Revising systems within policy organizations to support the above recommendations
Policy practitioners typically have annual performance agreements that include a professional development component. Performance agreements could incorporate the preceding suggestions to facilitate progress with respect to their implementation. Policy practitioners will also need to consider how to orient and train staff to ensure expectations and the provision of opportunities for knowledge development and exchange with academics. Finally, there are opportunities to create ‘communities of practice’ specific to gender and entrepreneurship, as a means of facilitating shared learning about the activities, results, and insights from academic research.
Suggestions for independent actions by academic researchers
There are also numerous actions that academic researchers can implement, on their own, to help ensure that their research on gender and entrepreneurship is accessible to, appreciated by, and acted upon within policy circles. The following suggestions offered by Carlson and Jennings pertain to knowledge production, knowledge dissemination, and scholarly training in particular.
Knowledge production
A key starting point is for academic researchers to enhance their awareness of the issues that policy practitioners are grappling with at the gender and entrepreneurship intersection – particularly those that would benefit from rigorously conducted research (for examples, see the prior Open Access Government article by Jennings and Carlson. Although the issues themselves are practice-oriented in nature, this does not preclude academic researchers from addressing them via scholarly theories and methods. As such, Carlson and Jennings believe that it is possible for academics to conduct studies that are not only relevant to public policy but also potentially publishable in scholarly outlets.
Knowledge dissemination
As for knowledge dissemination, Jennings and Carlson strongly encourage scholars at the gender and entrepreneurship nexus to work with organizations, such as Open Access Government, that are dedicated to informing policy practitioners of the findings from academic research. By sharing this task with entities that are already well-connected to policy circles, academics can realize three key benefits. For one, their research findings are far more likely to be read by policy practitioners who aren’t able to access scholarly journals. Second, by relying on the connections of others, academics free up time to focus on their actual research. Third, because the ‘responsibility turn’ has become increasingly salient and endorsed within many academic circles, scholars who commit to producing an outreach-oriented article related to each of their research projects are likely to be at least recognized – if not rewarded – for doing so.
Academic training
Given that policy practitioners rely upon media outlets for information, Carlson and Jennings strongly encourage academics to invest in media training – including that on how to utilize social media effectively. They also encourage scholars to include policy-oriented (or at least policy-relevant) research in the reading lists for graduate-level courses. Relatedly, Jennings and Carlson believe that it is vital for scholars who have been successful with knowledge translation/dissemination to communicate the benefits of engaging in such activities to their graduate students, their peers, and their university administrators. Indeed, Jennings can personally attest to the kudos that she has received for her efforts in this regard. All of the preceding recommendations are especially important for scholars conducting research on topics of especial socio-economic significance, such as that on gender and entrepreneurship.
Ideas for combined actions by policy practitioners and academic researchers
Last but certainly not least, Carlson and Jennings have ideas regarding the actions that policy practitioners and academic researchers can implement jointly to strengthen knowledge and policy at the gender and entrepreneurship nexus. This final set of suggestions calls attention to the importance of creating connections with opportunities for collaboration, building mutually respectful professional relationships, and viewing knowledge co-generation and co-translation as means rather than ends. In the descriptions below, Jennings and Carlson share how they implemented each idea over the evolution of their own academic-policy collaboration.
Creating connections with opportunities for collaboration
Numerous opportunities already exist for policy practitioners and academic researchers to network with one another during online forums and in-person workshops/conferences dedicated to gender and entrepreneurship. While these events offer a great way for members of either group to listen to and learn from the other, unfortunately, they rarely contain opportunities for members of both groups to work collaboratively on pertinent issues and/or questions. Carlson and Jennings thus encourage event planners to build more opportunities for joint knowledge creation, translation, and dissemination activities directly into the program. They also encourage attendees from the policy and academic realms to request and participate in formal opportunities of this nature.
That being said, Jennings and Carlson believe that policy professionals and university professors can also do a better job of using social media platforms to establish connections with one another in a more informal manner. Indeed, this is how their own collaboration began. In December of 2021, Carlson sent Jennings a message via LinkedIn, introducing herself as an Assistant Deputy Minister and noting their shared interest in gender and entrepreneurship. This resulted in an initial face-to-face meeting in a local coffee shop, which led to an invitation for Carlson to audit a doctoral seminar delivered by Jennings. The two have since become co-authors on an academic publication as well as two outreach-oriented articles and are likely to collaborate on future initiatives.
Building mutually respectful relationships
Once policy practitioners and academic researchers have become connected, Jennings and Carlson believe that it is extremely important for both parties to be cognizant and respectful of one another’s realities in order to collaborate effectively. In their experience, this requires a genuine willingness to understand and appreciate the institutional norms, opportunities, and challenges that exist in the other’s domain. It also requires the ability to refrain from privileging and imposing one reality upon the other.
Carlson and Jennings readily admit, however, that implementing the above advice is not always easy – and can sometimes even be uncomfortable. In retrospect, their instinctual decision to hold discussions in a neutral venue (the local coffee shop) or over the phone was undoubtedly helpful in this regard. This is because doing so did not unintentionally privilege one party’s physical domain, which could have subliminally signaled the prioritization of this individual’s “world”. Indeed, to this day, the duo has not met in either of their professional offices.
Venturing outside of their own domain was sometimes uncomfortable, but Carlson and Jennings are adamant that the occasional discomfort was worth it. It has certainly contributed to their professional development. More importantly, their journey has resulted in the opportunity to help others bridge the academic-policy divide that still exists at the nexus of gender and entrepreneurship.
Viewing knowledge co-generation and co-translation as means rather than ends
The final suggestion for combined action that Jennings and Carlson would like to share is consistent with the proverbial query about whether the chicken or the egg came first. Although the ideas elaborated above might seem like prerequisites for effective collaborations by policy practitioners and academic researchers, it is possible for a shared interest in co-generating, co-translating, and co-disseminating knowledge to serve as the impetus. In some such cases, such as that which Carlson and Jennings experienced, the development of a mutually respectful relationship can become the resultant output. The duo hopes that other academic-policy pairings will attain a similar outcome – regardless of whether they are dedicated to issues at the nexus of gender and entrepreneurship and/or other societally important topics.
Further details on the above points can be found in the full academic article by Carlson and Jennings, which is forthcoming for publication in a special issue of the International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research entitled “Exploring Entrepreneurship Policy in a Global Context: A gender perspective”.
