Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Monique Lortie and Lise Desmarais
funding organizations and <strong>the</strong>ir boards retain control over both quality and content. This same
structure is found in several o<strong>the</strong>r countries (e.g. Nordic nations, France). Also, in OHS, a notable
portion <strong>of</strong> knowledge aimed at researchers is knowledge developed by partners, practitioners,
organizations, workers, etc., with formalization and organization coming afterwards. Hence it is more
a matter <strong>of</strong> how one manages <strong>the</strong> field to bring to light implicit or latent knowledge than a problem <strong>of</strong>
knowledge management per se.
Literature on guides, which underpin <strong>the</strong> translation process, is equally pr<strong>of</strong>use in <strong>the</strong> health sector
where <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> papers published has risen from 444 in 1993 to 4975 in 2006 (Turner et al.,
2008). Given <strong>the</strong> explosion <strong>of</strong> writing, which is not <strong>the</strong> case in OHS, national and international task
forces have been put into place to draw up standards and procedures governing <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong>
guides, especially in Anglo-Saxon countries (e.g. Field and Lohr, 1990: Institute <strong>of</strong> Medicine in US,
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in UK, Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline
Network (SIGN) in Scotland, New Zealand Guidelines Group in New Zealand), as well as tools for
assessing <strong>the</strong>se guides (e.g. Appraisal <strong>of</strong> Guidelines Research and Evaluation in Europe – AGREE,
2003). All <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se guides on guides outline procedures providing for <strong>the</strong> systematic review <strong>of</strong>
literature based on carefully detailed criteria relating to search, data inclusion, exclusion and
assessment. Compliance with strict methodology and procedures in relation to reporting is viewed as
a basis for valid development. This process reflects <strong>the</strong> two-step process described by Graham et al.
(2006): The production <strong>of</strong> knowledge and <strong>the</strong> application. The guides are expected to take <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong>
statements. In OHS, both steps are closely intertwined. As a consequence, <strong>the</strong> processing <strong>of</strong> a
systematic literature review is not seen as a mandatory first step and <strong>the</strong> evidence-based concept is
not as broadly employed. OHS researchers are sensitive to <strong>the</strong> gap which exists between <strong>the</strong> format
<strong>of</strong> published scientific data and translation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> latter into practical guides or tools. The focus is more
on what is needed than on what is known.
In <strong>the</strong> instance <strong>of</strong> OHS, issues <strong>of</strong> knowledge transfer are <strong>of</strong>ten regarded as being closer to social
science perspectives where knowledge is normally viewed from a socio-constructivist standpoint and
where qualitative approaches are <strong>the</strong>refore dominant (Dagenais and Janosz, 2008; Gervais and
Chagnon, 2010). Verbal procedures are at <strong>the</strong> heart <strong>of</strong> OHS methodology and unsurprisingly, <strong>the</strong>
matter <strong>of</strong> exchanges falls at <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> topical knowledge transfer literature. In social sciences, <strong>the</strong>
extraction <strong>of</strong> user points <strong>of</strong> view, to allow citizens to express <strong>the</strong>ir opinions, is not so much regarded
as a means <strong>of</strong> improving <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> knowledge in <strong>the</strong> health sector but ra<strong>the</strong>r as a valuebased
or ethical issue (Christie, 2003), a perspective shared in OHS where workers are deemed
important knowledge partners. Also, guides published in social sciences <strong>of</strong>ten target a specific
population or context, <strong>the</strong>reby tending to be less universal in scope (Boisvert, 2008).
Contextualization is also <strong>of</strong>ten a major issue in OHS.
In management, more than in any o<strong>the</strong>r domain, transfer issues are formulated in terms <strong>of</strong> systems
and organizations ra<strong>the</strong>r than in terms <strong>of</strong> individuals (Roy et al., 1995, Haandzic et al., 2008). Transfer
issues are posed in terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> capability <strong>of</strong> organizations to circulate, absorb, generate and adapt
knowledge. In OHS, <strong>the</strong> technical or organizational systems are seen as inescapable elements to be
used in problem resolution. Organizations are also partners and <strong>of</strong>ten major interlocutors.
In natural sciences and engineering, <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> knowledge transfer is mostly viewed as a matter
pertaining to application, <strong>the</strong> dominant question being: “Could that knowledge be translated into
tangible, useful products?” The validity <strong>of</strong> knowledge is checked by putting it into action. The concept
<strong>of</strong> valorization is central (Beaudry et al., 2006). This perspective is at <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> different domains in
OHS, in particular toxicology and safety. Quantitative approaches outstrip qualitative approaches.
Normative approaches and standardization processes are well accepted, and <strong>the</strong> formulation <strong>of</strong>
standards is regarded as necessary.
In education, knowledge transfer or transmission is central to <strong>the</strong> sectoral mission. Major issues
include as follows: “How can an individual appropriate knowledge? What resources does this
individual need to mobilize to acquire this knowledge? How does knowledge allow him or her to
evolve and to shift into self-apprenticeship mode?”(Tardif, 1999; Presseau and Frenay, 2000)
In OHS, training is an important issue and many researchers are familiar with issues pertaining to
education. The point specific to OHS is that trainers targeted are <strong>of</strong>ten workers and not pr<strong>of</strong>essionals.
As a result, workers are more <strong>of</strong>ten than not viewed as essential brokers <strong>of</strong> knowledge.
545