Table 1. A typology of CLAHRC enactments.

	Formative interpretations and leadership styles	Governance structures	Epistemic base/professional groups involved	Capabilities	Challenges
Classical (Bluetown)	Research and dissemination model	KT activity focused around a small core set of senior managers.	Clinical-sciences paradigm. NHS facing.	Production of research evidence.	No CLAHRC-wide strategy to support KT.
	KT via dissemination of rigorous high-quality scientific research.	Centralized KT network.	Led by university hospital with strong research reputation.	Management presents a clear CLAHRC vision and strong control over output.	KT efforts localized to particular projects.
				Teams support local implementation.
Home-grown (Greentown)	Organizational learning model.	Decentralized KT network.	Clinical-academic paradigm. Academic-facing.	Idea/theory generation.	Confused CLAHRC mission/member roles.
	Purposefully engineers KT mechanisms.	KT activity distributed across the CLAHRC organizational hierarchy.	Led by mental health trust.	Builds research capacity in localities further away from the CLAHRC core.
Imported (Browntown)	Adaptation of Canadian KT model.	Distributed leadership: KT activity focused around a larger core set of senior managers.	Allied-health & nursing paradigm. NHS-facing.	Implementation/applied work.	Professional/disciplinary focus limits ability to draw on high profile clinical-academic research networks.
	Pre-existing hybrid roles of members to encourage natural KT.	Centralized KT network.	Led by a university hospital.	Builds capacity for ‘bottom-up’ engagement with ‘ward-level’ allied-health & nursing healthcare communities.

CLAHRC: Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care; KT: knowledge translation; NHS: National Health Service.