Cargando…

Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool

INTRODUCTION: This paper examines the process of developing a Research for Impact Tool in the contexts of general fiscal constraint, increased competition for funding, perennial concerns about the over-researching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues without demonstrable benefits as well...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tsey, Komla, Lawson, Kenny, Kinchin, Irina, Bainbridge, Roxanne, McCalman, Janya, Watkin, Felecia, Cadet-James, Yvonne, Rossetto, Allison
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4996827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27610359
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00160
_version_ 1782449651505430528
author Tsey, Komla
Lawson, Kenny
Kinchin, Irina
Bainbridge, Roxanne
McCalman, Janya
Watkin, Felecia
Cadet-James, Yvonne
Rossetto, Allison
author_facet Tsey, Komla
Lawson, Kenny
Kinchin, Irina
Bainbridge, Roxanne
McCalman, Janya
Watkin, Felecia
Cadet-James, Yvonne
Rossetto, Allison
author_sort Tsey, Komla
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This paper examines the process of developing a Research for Impact Tool in the contexts of general fiscal constraint, increased competition for funding, perennial concerns about the over-researching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues without demonstrable benefits as well as conceptual and methodological difficulties of evaluating research impact. The aim is to highlight the challenges and opportunities involved in evaluating research impact to serve as resource for potential users of the research for impact tool and others interested in assessing the impact of research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A combination of literature reviews, workshops with researchers, and reflections by project team members and partners using participatory snowball techniques. RESULTS: Assessing research impact is perceived to be difficult, akin to the so-called “wicked problem,” but not impossible. Heuristic and collaborative approach to research that takes the expectations of research users, research participants and the funders of research offers a pragmatic solution to evaluating research impact. The logic of the proposed Research for Impact Tool is based on the understanding that the value of research is to create evidence and/or products to support smarter decisions so as to improve the human condition. Research is, therefore, of limited value unless the evidence created is used to make smarter decisions for the betterment of society. A practical way of approaching research impact is, therefore, to start with the decisions confronting decision makers whether they are government policymakers, industry, professional practitioners, or households and the extent to which the research supports them to make smarter policy and practice decisions and the knock-on consequences of doing so. Embedded at each step in the impact planning and tracking process is the need for appropriate mix of expertise, capacity enhancement, and collaborative participatory learning-by-doing approaches. DISCUSSION: The tool was developed in the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research but the basic idea that the way to assess research impact is to start upfront with the information needs of decisions makers is equally applicable to research in other settings, both applied (horizontal) and basic (vertical) research. The tool will be further tested and evaluated with researchers over the next 2 years (2016/17). The decision by the Australian Government to include ‘industry engagement’ and ‘impact’ as additions to the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) quality measures from 2018 makes the Research for Impact Tool a timely development. The wider challenge is to engage with major Australian research funding agencies to ensure consistent alignment and approaches across research users, communities, and funders in evaluating impact.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4996827
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49968272016-09-08 Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool Tsey, Komla Lawson, Kenny Kinchin, Irina Bainbridge, Roxanne McCalman, Janya Watkin, Felecia Cadet-James, Yvonne Rossetto, Allison Front Public Health Public Health INTRODUCTION: This paper examines the process of developing a Research for Impact Tool in the contexts of general fiscal constraint, increased competition for funding, perennial concerns about the over-researching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues without demonstrable benefits as well as conceptual and methodological difficulties of evaluating research impact. The aim is to highlight the challenges and opportunities involved in evaluating research impact to serve as resource for potential users of the research for impact tool and others interested in assessing the impact of research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A combination of literature reviews, workshops with researchers, and reflections by project team members and partners using participatory snowball techniques. RESULTS: Assessing research impact is perceived to be difficult, akin to the so-called “wicked problem,” but not impossible. Heuristic and collaborative approach to research that takes the expectations of research users, research participants and the funders of research offers a pragmatic solution to evaluating research impact. The logic of the proposed Research for Impact Tool is based on the understanding that the value of research is to create evidence and/or products to support smarter decisions so as to improve the human condition. Research is, therefore, of limited value unless the evidence created is used to make smarter decisions for the betterment of society. A practical way of approaching research impact is, therefore, to start with the decisions confronting decision makers whether they are government policymakers, industry, professional practitioners, or households and the extent to which the research supports them to make smarter policy and practice decisions and the knock-on consequences of doing so. Embedded at each step in the impact planning and tracking process is the need for appropriate mix of expertise, capacity enhancement, and collaborative participatory learning-by-doing approaches. DISCUSSION: The tool was developed in the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research but the basic idea that the way to assess research impact is to start upfront with the information needs of decisions makers is equally applicable to research in other settings, both applied (horizontal) and basic (vertical) research. The tool will be further tested and evaluated with researchers over the next 2 years (2016/17). The decision by the Australian Government to include ‘industry engagement’ and ‘impact’ as additions to the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) quality measures from 2018 makes the Research for Impact Tool a timely development. The wider challenge is to engage with major Australian research funding agencies to ensure consistent alignment and approaches across research users, communities, and funders in evaluating impact. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4996827/ /pubmed/27610359 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00160 Text en Copyright © 2016 Tsey, Lawson, Kinchin, Bainbridge, McCalman, Watkin, Cadet-James and Rossetto. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Public Health
Tsey, Komla
Lawson, Kenny
Kinchin, Irina
Bainbridge, Roxanne
McCalman, Janya
Watkin, Felecia
Cadet-James, Yvonne
Rossetto, Allison
Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool
title Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool
title_full Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool
title_fullStr Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool
title_short Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool
title_sort evaluating research impact: the development of a research for impact tool
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4996827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27610359
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00160
work_keys_str_mv AT tseykomla evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT lawsonkenny evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT kinchinirina evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT bainbridgeroxanne evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT mccalmanjanya evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT watkinfelecia evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT cadetjamesyvonne evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool
AT rossettoallison evaluatingresearchimpactthedevelopmentofaresearchforimpacttool