Interorganizational knowledge sharing to establish digital health learning ecosystems: Qualitative evaluation of a national digital health transformation program in England

22Citations
Citations of this article
104Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: The English Global Digital Exemplar (GDE) program is one of the first concerted efforts to create a digital health learning ecosystem across a national health service. Objective: This study aims to explore mechanisms that support or inhibit the exchange of interorganizational digital transformation knowledge. Methods: We conducted a formative qualitative evaluation of the GDE program. We used semistructured interviews with clinical, technical, and managerial staff; national program managers and network leaders; nonparticipant observations of knowledge transfer activities through attending meetings, workshops, and conferences; and documentary analysis of policy documents. The data were thematically analyzed by drawing on a theory-informed sociotechnical coding framework. We used a mixture of deductive and inductive methods, supported by NVivo software, to facilitate coding. Results: We conducted 341 one-on-one and 116 group interviews, observed 86 meetings, and analyzed 245 documents from 36 participating provider organizations. We also conducted 51 high-level interviews with policy makers and vendors; performed 77 observations of national meetings, workshops, and conferences; and analyzed 80 national documents. Formal processes put in place by the GDE program to initiate and reinforce knowledge transfer and learning have accelerated the growth of informal knowledge networking and helped establish the foundations of a learning ecosystem. However, formal networks were most effective when supported by informal networking. The benefits of networking were enhanced (and costs reduced) by geographical proximity, shared culture and context, common technological functionality, regional and strategic alignments, and professional agendas. Conclusions: Knowledge exchange is most effective when sustained through informal networking driven by the mutual benefits of sharing knowledge and convergence between group members in their organizational and technological setting and goals. Policy interventions need to enhance incentives and reduce barriers to sharing across the ecosystem, be flexible in tailoring formal interventions to emerging needs, and promote informal knowledge sharing.

References Powered by Scopus

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups

23640Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Knowledge flows within multinational corporations

2588Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks

1765Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Interorganizational knowledge sharing to establish digital health learning ecosystems: Qualitative evaluation of a national digital health transformation program in England

22Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Establishing a Cystic Fibrosis Learning Network: Interventions to promote collaboration and data-driven improvement at scale

13Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Engaging the disability community in informatics research: Rationales and practical steps

9Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cresswell, K., Sheikh, A., Franklin, B. D., Krasuska, M., Nguyen, H. T., Hinder, S., … Williams, R. (2021, August 1). Interorganizational knowledge sharing to establish digital health learning ecosystems: Qualitative evaluation of a national digital health transformation program in England. Journal of Medical Internet Research. JMIR Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.2196/23372

Readers over time

‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25010203040

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 18

51%

Researcher 8

23%

Professor / Associate Prof. 6

17%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Business, Management and Accounting 8

38%

Social Sciences 5

24%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 5

24%

Computer Science 3

14%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0