Authors : Ruth A O’Connor, Sejul Malde, A Wendy Russell, Maya Haviland, Kate Bellchambers, Kirsty Jones, Ginny M Sargent, Sara Bice
University research has a vital role to play in addressing complex societal challenges. The research impact (RI) agenda should enable this but is critiqued for creating an audit culture focused narrowly on economic returns on investment and university rankings. There is a need for alternative approaches that better support research for societal benefit. A current hiatus in research assessment processes in Australia provides an opportunity to explore alternatives.
In this study, we elicited responses from 53 university staff in academic and professional roles to explore what constitutes research impact in practice, and what helps to achieve it. The responses highlight a disconnect between the current institutional framing of research impact and both the practices and values of those seeking to create societal benefit through research.
We identify four tensions between the motivations and practice of research staff on one hand and the research impact agenda on the other. Tensions related to (1) narrow definitions of impact inadequately encompassing valuable work; (2) the premise of linear impact pathways inaccurately portraying the complexity of impact; (3) assessment rewarding individual endeavour over collaboration; and (4) assessment focusing on auditing rather than learning through evaluation.
We take these findings and apply current theories of public and cultural value to offer ‘research value’ as an alternative approach to address the four tensions and nurture research for societal benefit.
URL : From ‘research impact’ to ‘research value’: a new approach to support research for societal benefit
