Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29494644›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Knowledge diffusion within a large conservation organization and beyond.

Jonathan R B Fisher, Jensen Montambault, Kyle P Burford, Trisha Gopalakrishna, Yuta J Masuda, Sheila M W Reddy, Kaitlin Torphy, Andrea I Salcedo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jonathan R B FisherThe Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5094-9730
Jensen MontambaultThe Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
Kyle P BurfordThe Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
Trisha GopalakrishnaThe Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
Yuta J MasudaThe Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
Sheila M W ReddyThe Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
Kaitlin TorphyCollege of Education, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
Andrea I SalcedoThe Nature Conservancy, Quito, Ecuador.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The spread and uptake of new ideas (diffusion of innovations) is critical for organizations to adapt over time, but there is little evidence of how this happens within organizations and to their broader community. To address this, we analyzed how individuals accessed information about a recent science innovation at a large, international, biodiversity conservation non-profit-The Nature Conservancy-and then traced the flow of how this information was shared within the organization and externally, drawing on an exceptionally data-rich environment. We used surveys and tracking of individual internet activity to understand mechanisms for early-stage diffusion (knowledge seeking and sharing) following the integration of social science and evidence principles into the institutional planning framework: Conservation by Design (CbD 2.0). Communications sent to all employees effectively catalyzed 56.4% to exhibit knowledge seeking behavior, measured by individual downloads from and visits to a restricted-access site. Individuals who self-reported through a survey that they shared information about CbD 2.0 internally were more likely to have both received and sought out information about the framework. Such individuals tended to hold positions within a higher job grade, were more likely to train others on CbD as part of their job, and to enroll in other online professional development offerings. Communication strategies targeting external audiences did not appear to influence information seeking behavior. Staff who engaged in internal knowledge sharing and adopting "evidence" practices from CbD 2.0 were more likely to have shared the document externally. We found a negative correlation with external sharing behavior and in-person trainings. Our findings suggest repeated, direct email communications aimed at wide audiences can effectively promote diffusion of new ideas. We also found a wide range of employee characteristics and circumstances to be associated with knowledge diffusion behavior (at both an organizational and individual level).

Indexed as

Access to InformationInternetCommunicationHumansKnowledgeOrganizationsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID29494644
PMCPMC5832310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.