Practitioner questionnaire — evidence to influence

About your work

01 Tell me about your role and organisation

Current role

Working context

Sector

Approximate organisation size

Organisation name (optional)

02 Which forms of evidence do you regularly work with?

Select all that apply.

A recent example

03 Think of a recent occasion when evidence helped shape an idea, recommendation or piece of work that influenced a decision. What happened?

Describe the situation, the evidence and what changed. Please avoid confidential details.

I cannot think of a suitable example

04 Where did the evidence come from, and what made it useful or credible?

Select all that apply.

What made this evidence useful or credible? (optional)

05 What decision, action or change did the resulting idea influence?

This might include a strategic decision, product change, campaign direction, investment, operational action, change in understanding or decision not to act.

How clear was that influence?

The influence was clear and directly observableThe idea contributed alongside other factorsThe influence was indirect or difficult to establishThe idea did not ultimately influence a decisionI do not know

How influence happened

06 Who connected the evidence to the eventual idea or decision?

Select all that apply.

Who, if anyone, connected different stages or teams? (optional)

07 What most helped the idea gain influence?

Select up to three.

Where knowledge is lost

08 Where is valuable knowledge most likely to be lost or underused?

Select up to three.

What usually happens to useful evidence after the immediate project?

It is actively reused and developedIt is sometimes reused when someone remembers itIt is stored but rarely revisitedIt remains mainly within the original teamIt is difficult to find or effectively disappearsIt varies too much to generaliseI do not know Other

What, if anything, helps your organisation reuse knowledge? (optional)

AI and improvement

09 How, if at all, is AI changing the way you work with evidence and ideas?

Select all that apply.

What has improved, and what has become weaker or riskier? (optional) Where is specialist input or human judgement still necessary? (optional)

10 If you could change one thing about how your organisation turns evidence into influential ideas, what would it be?

About you and your permissions

The ten research questions are complete. This final section covers who you are, whether I may contact you and how your response may be used. Contact details are optional unless you would like follow-up.

Did any question feel unclear, repetitive, leading or difficult? (optional)

This is a pilot — your feedback shapes the next version.

About you Name (optional unless you would like follow-up) Email address (optional unless you would like follow-up) Organisation (optional)

Contact permissions

Each choice is independent and entirely optional.

You may contact me to clarify or discuss this response. I am open to a 30-minute Compare Notes conversation. I would like to hear when findings from this research are published.

Hearing about research findings is a research-update permission only. It does not subscribe you to the Editorial Intelligence email list, and nothing you do on this page will. If you want those updates as well, that is a separate choice you make on the keep in touch page.

How may your response be used? (required)

My response may be analysed as part of the research, but not quoted or described in published outputs. My response may be used anonymously in research findings and publications. You may approach me separately for approval to use an attributed quotation or example.

Choosing the third option does not provide advance permission to attribute anything. I will contact you with the exact proposed wording and context before publication.

How your information is handled

Who is responsible: Asavin Wattanajantra, as the independent researcher behind the Editorial Intelligence Research Project.

What is collected: your questionnaire answers and, only if you provide them, your name, email address and organisation.

Why: to analyse how evidence becomes influential ideas inside organisations and to publish aggregated, anonymised findings on the terms you choose above. Responses are also reviewed for where the methodology might be commercially useful, because Editorial Intelligence is a professional practice as well as a research programme. No approach about working together follows from that unless you raise it first.

Where it is stored: submissions are processed by Formspree (the form service behind this page) and then held in a private research tracker. They are kept for the duration of the research programme and deleted when no longer needed.

Who can access it: only the researcher. Contact details are never published, shared, or added to the Editorial Intelligence email list. Research contact details are held separately from that list and the two are not combined.

Withdrawal: email asavin@editorialintelligence.co at any time to withdraw or request deletion of your response. Once findings have been aggregated or anonymised, your individual response can still be deleted, but it may no longer be possible to remove its influence from already-published aggregate findings.

Your wider rights: the privacy policy sets out your rights of access, correction and deletion, and how to exercise them.

How does evidence become an influential idea?

Thank you for contributing to the Editorial Intelligence Research Project.