From Evidence to Impact: What the Research Translation Continuum Reveals About Collaboration
In the first post of this series, we explored why academic–practitioner collaborations matter. In this piece we will explore two key aspects of partnerships.
Let’s consider a familiar challenge: Chronic absenteeism in schools.
A middle school teacher notices half her students missing class. A nonprofit is working with families to remove barriers that keep kids out. An academic is studying statewide attendance data.
Each sees part of the picture. But only together could they design solutions that actually improve student success. That’s the promise of academic–practitioner partnerships.
But not all partnerships work the same way, or deliver the same impact - A recent review of 93 studies done by Brunese and colleagues (2024) introduces a Research Translation Continuum, which highlights two critical factors that make the difference: how partners engage and how evidence is used.
Research Translation Continuum
The Partner Engagement Spectrum: How do academics and practitioners collaborate?
Partnerships vary in how deeply academics and practitioners engage. At one end are co-productive efforts, where both sides sit together from the start to ask: Why are we doing this research? How will we collaborate? What outputs, beyond a publication, will help the cause? And what needs to be done so findings are usable?
Moving along the spectrum, partnerships may be participatory (involving stakeholders in key decisions), consultative(seeking input at specific points), transactional (limited, task-focused interactions), or minimal (little to no engagement).
The Evidence–Utilization Spectrum: Do partners plan ahead for how evidence will be used?
At one end, evidence is co-created with clear goals, practical applications, and built-in ways to measure impact, grounded in local realities and designed for easy uptake. At the other, evidence is generated without much thought for application, leaving others to discover and interpret it (if they do at all).
What This Looks Like in Practice
Take our absenteeism example. The same partnership can unfold in very different ways:
From the start, the academic and nonprofit design the project together. Families and school leaders help frame the right questions: What’s keeping students home? Transportation? Mental health? Safety? The research reflects these lived realities. Findings are shared along the way, leading to rapid testing of new supports like family outreach or ride-share programs.
The result? Attendance improves, policies shift, and both partners see tangible impact. This is Proactive research translation.
In another scenario the researcher works independently, publishes results in an academic journal, and moves on. Months later, the nonprofit stumbles across the article. They try to adapt the findings, but the research doesn’t quite fit their community’s needs. Without the researcher’s input, evidence is unevenly applied. Sometimes it sparks an idea, but just as often, it doesn’t stick.
In this scenario, impact is left largely to chance. This is Post-facto collaboration.
Why This Matters
Funding is dwindling and trust in both universities and nonprofits is eroding. In this environment, partnerships can’t just exist on paper. They need to be intentional - clear about how much engagement is expected, how evidence will be used, and what success looks like for everyone involved.
Sometimes a lighter, post-facto approach makes sense. But too often, we assume partnerships are more engaged than they really are, and that mismatch leads to disappointment, wasted effort, and research that never gets used.
The Takeaway
If you are entering a collaboration, ask two questions:
1. How much forethought is going into how evidence will be used?
2. How deeply will we engage with each other throughout the process?
Where you sit on the Research Translation Continuum can make the difference between research that sits on a shelf, and research that changes lives.
So, before your next partnership begins, be clear: Where do we want to be on this continuum?
Let’s talk about how we can support your institution to be more intentional in the Partnership. Contact us at info@saathpartners.com
References:
Riddering, L., Towns, A., Brunese, P., & Yih, Y. (2024). Research Translation for International Development: A Literature Review and Framework for Evidence Use and Partner Engagement. Progress in Development Studies, https://doi.org/10.1177/14649934231211731