Our project exploring the links between evidence and innovation is now complete.
This project has bridged two of the core work streams at IRISS; evidence-informed practice and innovation and improvement. Ahead of the final report, this blog provides an overview of the key findings and highlights how this work will feed into the broader work and priorities of IRISS.
This project has used theoretical, empirical and practice literature and case studies to reflect on the links between evidence and innovation in the context of Scotland’s social services. It has been exploratory in nature. This exploratory approach has been necessary due to the lack of existing work that considers evidence and innovation side-by-side. Given the nature of this approach, and the topic itself, definitive conclusions are unrealistic. However, the report has served to highlight the following points in relation to this project, which would benefit from further exploration in future work.
Summary of Key Findings:
- Evidence and innovation are potentially complementary or antagonistic reform agendas depending on how these words are defined, conceptualised and mobilised. This topic is therefore complex and dynamic.
- How evidence and innovation are defined, conceptualised and mobilised can have important implications for practice, particularly in relation to issues of implementation, risk and scale.
- It is likely that the meanings of, and relationships between, these terms varies and evolves during the process of implementing a new policy, and in the process of everyday practice.
- What counts as good or useful evidence is likely to be highly contextual, varying according to the immediate requirements of those involved at different stages of the innovation process. This means that quite different types of evidence may become useful at different points during the implementation of a new policy.
- The case studies reviewed as part of this project emphasised the view of evidence as an integrating vehicle for disparate types of knowledge and expertise. This includes theoretical and empirical research, practitioner wisdom and views, and the views and ideas of those who use services.
- We need individuals and organisations to share more, and to share in an honest, detailed way. There is a gap in the evidence-base concerning the links between evidence and innovation. In part this is a gap at the theoretical level: these concepts have rarely been discussed together in the academic arena. However, this is not helped by another gap in the evidence-base; a gap in the documenting of innovations by the social service workforce, and by people who use services. Where this is done it tends towards a rose-tinted view and a rather thin documentation of how evidence is used and why. Instead we need more thorough documentations of the innovation process, including its set-backs and complexities, and the role evidence plays.
The forthcoming report will feed into business development discussions at IRISS about how we are supporting evidence-use and innovation across the social services, and whether our current organisational structure best facilitates this.