Knowledge translation methods of the Gauteng provincial government employee health and wellness programme

• Main Author: Mtshengu, Vuyolwethu B R
• Format: Others
• Language: en
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10539/26105

Thesis submitted in Fifty percent completion of the degree of Master of Management in the field of Public Policy at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. 30 March 2017 === The integration of new discoveries in health programmes has been an integral part of improving their implementation and outcomes. However, there is an information gap that tends to exist between policy developers, decision makers, researchers, and implementers. This often results in misunderstanding and inconsistencies from ‘what is implemented’ versus ‘what should be implemented’ due to differences in interpreting and using the knowledge available. Using a qualitative research approach, this study set out to explore how the Gauteng Provincial Government’s (GPG) Employee Health and Wellness Programme (EHWP) translates knowledge into implementation. It considers the different designated Knowledge Translation (KT) roles in the programme as well as the hindrances that exist in executing the identified KT methods. Data was collected through reviewing relevant documents to the programme in the public sector, conducting two focus groups with ten participants as well as five in-depth individual interviews, using semi-structured questionnaires. The participants represented ten Gauteng provincial departments and two national departments. The data was analysed using the thematic analysis approach to establish contrasting and correlating information in the emerging themes. The themes were compared to the Knowledge to Action (KTA) model, to assess the correlation with the existing KT frameworks in literature. The significant finding of the study indicated that the established GPG EHWP KT methods, have taken on the steps of the KTA model. However, they did not adopt its process sequence, nor did they have a specified clear path that was practised in the programme. This resulted in a knowledge gap, misinterpretation, and confusion at implementation level. Therefore, the programme may benefit from having a systematic framework, which will be able to guide KT, assess barriers, and clarify roles at each stage of implementation. === MT 2018