Efforts to reduce the gap between the research evidence base and humanitarian responses have focused on producing quality evidence and ensuring its use in decision-making. Yet, how evidence translates into field-level implementation is not well understood in humanitarian contexts. This study analysed how recommendations produced through academic research partnerships were implemented by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Lebanon and Myanmar. The methodology included: social network analysis to represent collective dynamics; document reviews to assess implementation; qualitative interviews to comprehend why actors engaged; and a critical appraisal of these combined results. The application of Extended Normalization Process Theory provided information on 'anticipation of constraints' (access to information, staff turnover, context specificity, and the need to engage as a cohesive group). Future research efforts should concentrate explicitly on identifying and tackling implementation barriers such as power imbalances and ethical dilemmas related to service delivery by humanitarian actors.