Development of an Integrated Threefold Framework for Knowledge Application Based on the Connection of Theory, Practice, and Ethics: A Model Design and Expert Validation

Abstract

The persistent gap between the production of scientific evidence and its practical application remains a significant challenge in the social sciences and management fields. This study aimed to present an innovative model to bridge this gap. First, a systematic literature review was conducted to identify the shortcomings of existing frameworks. Subsequently, drawing on the Delphi method and expert opinion, a threefold model for knowledge application was developed. The model comprises three complementary approaches—adaptive, value‐added, and extension—distinctively delineated at strategic and operational levels. To guide the development and validation of the model, two research questions were formulated: (i) how to design a threefold model incorporating the three approaches at both levels, and (ii) to what extent experts validate its components, prerequisites, and ethical charter. The findings provide explicit answers to these questions through a dedicated section in the Results and a summary table. A systematic literature review was undertaken to identify theoretical and practical gaps in existing frameworks. Based on this analysis, the proposed threefold model was developed. A three‐round Delphi process was then conducted with 20 academic and executive experts to evaluate and refine the model. Content validity and expert consensus were assessed using the Content Validity Index (CVI), Content Validity Ratio (CVR), and Interquartile Range (IQR). To operationalize the model, an application scenario of the value‐added approach, a responsibility matrix (RACI), and a 20‐item implementation checklist were designed. The model was also systematically compared with the widely cited CFIR, EPIS, and NASSS frameworks. The expert panel achieved a consensus level exceeding 85% for all model components, confirming the framework's robustness and scientific adequacy. The value‐added scenario demonstrated that the model can successfully guide interdisciplinary knowledge transfer (from artificial intelligence to medicine) through the six defined stages. The implementation checklist provided a tangible tool for monitoring application progress in real‐world projects. The structured comparison revealed that the threefold model fills three principal gaps in existing frameworks: the distinction between strategic and operational levels, the coverage of multiple knowledge application pathways, and the structural embedding of an operational ethical charter. The threefold model can serve as a practical tool for policymakers, managers, and practitioners to facilitate the transfer of knowledge into action. The study's innovation lies in integrating three complementary approaches, distinguishing between strategic and operational layers, embedding an ethical charter within the framework, and providing operational tools (scenario, RACI matrix, checklist). Future research should empirically test the model in real‐world contexts and develop quantitative indicators to assess its effectiveness.