3 resultados para Maps of structured knowledge
em Dalarna University College Electronic Archive
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Annually, 2.8 million neonatal deaths occur worldwide, despite the fact that three-quarters of them could be prevented if available evidence-based interventions were used. Facilitation of community groups has been recognized as a promising method to translate knowledge into practice. In northern Vietnam, the Neonatal Health - Knowledge Into Practice trial evaluated facilitation of community groups (2008-2011) and succeeded in reducing the neonatal mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95 % confidence interval 0.30-0.89). The aim of this paper is to report on the process (implementation and mechanism of impact) of this intervention. METHODS: Process data were excerpted from diary information from meetings with facilitators and intervention groups, and from supervisor records of monthly meetings with facilitators. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. An evaluation including attributes and skills of facilitators (e.g., group management, communication, and commitment) was performed at the end of the intervention using a six-item instrument. Odds ratios were analyzed, adjusted for cluster randomization using general linear mixed models. RESULTS: To ensure eight active facilitators over 3 years, 11 Women's Union representatives were recruited and trained. Of the 44 intervention groups, composed of health staff and commune stakeholders, 43 completed their activities until the end of the study. In total, 95 % (n = 1508) of the intended monthly meetings with an intervention group and a facilitator were conducted. The overall attendance of intervention group members was 86 %. The groups identified 32 unique problems and implemented 39 unique actions. The identified problems targeted health issues concerning both women and neonates. Actions implemented were mainly communication activities. Communes supported by a group with a facilitator who was rated high on attributes and skills (n = 27) had lower odds of neonatal mortality (odds ratio, 0.37; 95 % confidence interval, 0.19-0.73) than control communes (n = 46). CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation identified several factors that might have influenced the outcomes of the trial: continuity of intervention groups' work, adequate attributes and skills of facilitators, and targeting problems along a continuum of care. Such factors are important to consider in scaling-up efforts.
Resumo:
Some 50% of the people in the world live in rural areas, often under harsh conditions and in poverty. The need for knowledge of how to improve living conditions is well documented. In response to this need, new knowledge of how to improve living conditions in rural areas and elsewhere is continuously being developed by researchers and practitioners around the world. People in rural areas, in particular, would certainly benefit from being able to share relevant knowledge with each other, as well as with stakeholders (e.g. researchers) and other organizations (e.g. NGOs). Central to knowledge management is the idea of knowledge sharing. This study is based on the assumption that knowledge management can support sustainable development in rural and remote regions. It aims to present a framework for knowledge management in sustainable rural development, and an inventory of existing frameworks for that. The study is interpretive, with interviews as the primary source for the inventory of stakeholders, knowledge categories and Information and Communications Technology (ICT) infrastructure. For the inventory of frameworks, a literature study was carried out. The result is a categorization of the stakeholders who act as producers and beneficiaries of explicit and indigenous development knowledge. Stakeholders are local government, local population, academia, NGOs, civil society and donor agencies. Furthermore, the study presents a categorization of the development knowledge produced by the stakeholders together with specifications for the existing ICT infrastructure. Rural development categories found are research, funding, agriculture, ICT, gender, institutional development, local infrastructure development, and marketing & enterprise. Finally, a compiled framework is presented, and it is based on ten existing frameworks for rural development that were found in the literature study, and the empirical findings of the Gilgit-Baltistan case. Our proposed framework is divided in four levels where level one consists of the identified stakeholders, level two consists of rural development categories, level three of the knowledge management system and level four of sustainable rural development based on the levels below. In the proposed framework we claim that the sustainability of rural development can be achieved through a knowledge society in which knowledge of the rural development process is shared among all relevant stakeholders.
Resumo:
Purpose – This research focuses on finding the reasons, why members from different sectors join a cross-sector/multi-stakeholder CSR network and what motivates them to share (or not to share) their knowledge of CSR and their best practices. Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the largest cross-sector CSR network in Sweden. The sample base of 15 people was chosen to be able to represent a wider variety of members from each participating sectors. As well as the CEO of the intermediary organization was interviewed. The interviews were conducted via email and telephone. Findings – The findings include several reasons linked to the business case of CSR such as stakeholder pressure, competitive advantage, legitimacy and reputation as well as new reasons like the importance of CSR, and the access of further knowledge in the field. Further reasons are in line with members wanting to join a network, such as access to contact or having personal contacts. As to why members are sharing their CSR knowledge, the findings indicate to inspire others, to show CSR commitment, to be visible, it leads to business opportunity and the access of others knowledge, and because it was requested. Reasons for not sharing their knowledge would be the lack of opportunity, lack of time and the lack of experience to do so. Originality/value – The research contributes to existing studies, which focused on Corporate Social Responsibility and cross-sector networking as well as to inter-organizational knowledge sharing in the field of CSR.