The problemWe would all like to believe that the best possible evidence informs health policy. Unfortunately, the translation of evidence into policy is not a simple process. Numerous factors influence policy development because decision making is an inherently social process, not just a technical exercise. Expert opinion, political sensitivities, organisational constraints, primary re- search and systematic reviews may all contribute to a given decision, but the priority accorded some elements over others rests well outside the bounds of a researcher's influence.1 Even more sobering is the fact that the importance of evidence in the policy-development process may erode over time.2The good news is that the Australian government wants to improve the quality of policy, and a 2010 document entitled Ahead of the Game: Blueprint for the Reform of Australian Government Administration expressly directed public servants to establish or reinvigorate partnerships with academia and research.3 Moreover, in 2011, 21 Australian Public Service department heads endorsed the call for public servants to employ 'the most up-to-date thinking and approaches' and to 'more effectively use the innovative capacity of a much broader base.'4 At both the national and state levels, health departments have been trying to improve exchange at the research-policy interface for some time. The Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing established the Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute, at the Australian National University, in 2003 (www. anu.edu.au/aphcri/)5 and in 2011 it created a knowledge-broker- age position located at Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute, which is currently held by one of the authors (PMcI). Similarly, the Sax Institute (www.saxinstitute.org.au) was creat- ed with core funding from NSW Health, and operates a knowl- edge-brokerage service that has completed 87 evidence checks since 2005. Furthermore, National Health and Medical Research Council funding has been provided to establish the Centre for Informing Policy in Health with Evidence from Research (http:// acc .cochrane. org/cipher).Australian governments are clearly expressing a desire to improve the research-policy interface through promotion of partnerships and increased interaction between researchers and policy makers. However, any health researcher keen to seize this opportunity is likely to face two problems: the apparent cultural differences between knowledge producers and users, and the rapid cycling of individuals through various positions within health departments.The former problem can be explained by the 'two commu- nities' theory, which posits that the producers and users of knowledge 'live in separate worlds with different and often conflicting values, different reward systems, and different languages. '6 Research into the attitudes of upper-level executives in the US government provided the empirical base for this theory. A multivariate analysis demonstrated that the difference between users and non-users of data external to government departments was explained by the cultural gap between government officials and social scientists, rather than the specific knowledge required for a given policy problem or by the real or imagined constraints of working within a bureaucratic system.The 'broken link' phenomenon arises when a research pro- ducer establishes a good working relationship with a potential research user, only to have that individual move to another position and be replaced by someone with little or no content knowledge. The regular movement of departmental staff between positions is a deeply embedded cultural phenomenon, which can be traced back to the 1976 Royal Commission on Australian Government Administration .7 The review recommended, among other things, that public servants move across areas and depart- ments to break down the silos that had developed.7 The movement among multiple roles, departments and areas continues today and is promoted at the highest level with the notion of a single leadership cadre across the Australian Public Service, as expressed in One APS - One SES. …