Information Commons Issues and Trends: Voices From the Frontline

Attendees at this ACRL panel were invited to increase their understanding of Information Commons (IC) concepts, models, planning, implementation and assessment. The event was a discussion panel with IC leaders regarding models that their libraries were developing, evolutionary processes their ICs have undergone, challenges and successes in the past years, and what the future holds

The ACT transport: Panacea for the 80's or designer's illusion (panel discussion)

A panel discussion was held which attempted to make an objective and pragmatic assessment of the standing of active control technology. The discussion focused on the standing of active control technology relative to civil air transport applications, the value as opposed to the cost of the projected benefits, the need for research, development, and demonstration, the role of government and industry in developing the technology, the major obstacles to its implementation, and the probable timing of the full utilization of active control technology in commercial transportation. An edited transcription of the prepared statements of the panel members and the subsequent open discussion between the panel and the audience is presented

Knowledge Management: The Cultural Context for Enabling Technology

The purpose of the panel discussion is to share and discuss findings of the panellist’s’ research into knowledge management and their understanding of the cultural and human factors that support effective implementation of technology. The panel will comprise presentations and discussion on the cultural imperatives and implications of knowledge management, including: preparing the cultural context, designing and implementing supporting tools and making interventions and changes after implementation

User-centered healthcare IT: meaningful or meaningless?

This panel aims to discuss concepts, assumptions and visions of user- centered information technology for healthcare. It presents two opposite views on the subject. The discussion is informed by findings of three research projects evaluating the implementation of e-prescribing systems, electronic transmission of prescriptions, and electronic health records in the UK. The timeliness and perhaps urgency of such a debate are due to the incessantly increasing worldwide computerization of healthcare, concurrent to an ambiguity of the effect of IT on care processes, outcomes and user satisfaction

Science Panel Discussion presentation: Data Management in Biomedical Engineering: Needs and Implementation

Glenn Gaudette, PhD, is an Associate Professor, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute. He discussed data management in his research laboratory, which is focused on regenerating mechanical and electrophysiological function in hearts with cardiovascular disease

Gender Equality and Goal 6: The Critical Connection.

This discussion paper is intended to contribute to the implementation of the High Level Panel on Water (HLPW) Action Plan. It should be read alongside other framing notes commissioned by the Australian Water Partnership.4 The key points of intersection with the High Level Panel on Water Action Plan are shown in Figure 1. This Discussion Paper identifies and explains key areas of action for the High Level Panel on Water and other international development actors and governments. The paper provides a range of case studies, and the implications for improving policy and practice are outlined. This paper focuses primarily on the HLPW Action Plan’s ‘Water Governance’ and ‘Universal Access to Safe Water and Sanitation’ themes

Compensating for severe nuclear accidents: An expert elucidation

We present the results of a structured discussion held in London in July 2014 involving a panel of experts drawn from three communities: specialists on aspects of risk and insurance; lawyers concerned with issues of nuclear law; and safety and environmental regulators. The discussions were held on the basis of participant anonymity. The process emphasised three considerations: conceptions of loss arising from a severe nuclear accident; the specifics of the Fukushima-Daiichi accident and what it means for policy and strategy going forward; and the future of liability regimes. We observe some stoicism from those closest to implementation of policies and procedures associated with nuclear risks, but a lower level of certainty and confidence among those concerned with nuclear energy regulation

LAI Working With the US Army for Enterprise Transformation

Overview • Eric Rebentisch: LAI/Army ESAT overview (Army Materiel Enterprise, System of Systems Engineering), reflections on the ESAT process • Nancy Moulton: Army Materiel Enterprise (ME) reflections on the experience, on-going efforts and progress • Jerry Coover: Implementation efforts and change dynamics, other enterprise perspectives • Panel discussion and Q&

Proceedings from the Second Annual Conference of the Norwegian Network for Implementation Research

In 2019, Norwegian implementation researchers formed a network to promote implementation research and practice in the Norwegian context. On November 19th, 2021, the second annual Norwegian implementation conference was held in Oslo. Ninety participants from all regions of the country gathered to showcase the frontiers of Norwegian implementation research. The conference also hosted a panel discussion about critical next steps for implementation science in Norway. The conference included 17 presentations from diverse disciplines within health and welfare services, including schools. The themes presented included stakeholder engagement, implementation mechanisms, evaluations of the implementation of specific interventions, the use of implementation guidelines and frameworks, the development and validation of implementation measurements, and barriers and facilitators for implementation. The panel discussion highlighted several critical challenges with the implementation of evidence-informed practices in Norway, including limited implementation competence and capacity among practice leaders and workforces, few opportunities for education in implementation science, limited implementation research in the Norwegian context, scarce funding possibilities for implementation research, and a lack of long-term perspectives on implementation processes. Overall, the 2021 Norwegian implementation conference showed an encouraging sign of a maturing field of science in Norway. The more voluminous proceedings from the 2020 conference called for several important advancements to improve implementation science and practice in Norway, and the 2021 conference indicates that steps have already been taken in favorable directions in terms of, for instance, research designs and measurements. However, there are still unexploited potentials for improvements in implementation research, funding, policies, and practice. Norwegian implementation researcher should be mindful of the challenges and potential pitfalls implementation science currently face as a scientific discipline.publishedVersio