Organisational factors and academic research agendas: an analysis of academics in the social sciences

Abstract

Organisational factors and academic research agendas: an analysis of academics in the social sciences Academic research demands placed on contemporary universities are strongly related to the production of breakthrough research. Both governments and university management strive to make the production of academic research more cost-efficient and have implemented measures to ensure this. Top-down policies influenced by new public management and managerialism have been introduced, pushing for competitiveness and performativity in academic research setups. These policies and guidelines have been criticised by academics as having eroded collegiality and autonomy, which are considered necessary to achieve quality research. The focus of this study is on social sciences and aligns with this critique, demonstrating that autonomy and collegiality are the key organisational features in fostering multidisciplinary, collaborative and riskier research agendas leading to breakthroughs. Academics with high levels of organisational commitment are more likely to create research agendas that assume more conservative, discipline bound and risk-averse traits, having less potential to derive the intended research.

The association of thinking styles with research agendas among academics in the social sciences

“…However, current performativity, indicators craze, research assessments and research projects' limited duration and expected deliverables may be driving for publications en masse with short‐term focuses, rather than fomenting research programmes that are longer term, stable and focused on innovative and transformative research (Horta & Santos, ; Young, ). This means that some academics with specific thinking styles are likely to be at a disadvantage in the current academic environment, and also that some research agendas associated with these thinking styles may not reach the potential that they could possibly achieve, with potential detrimental consequences for knowledge advancement.…”

“…Moreover, these studies do not account for the changes to the academic profession and work in recent decades, which have been strongly influenced by research assessments, institutional pressures towards performativity, 'publish or perish' dynamics and demands that research impact is evidenced (Chubb & Watermeyer, 2017;Kenny, 2018;Martin-Sardesai, Irvine, Tooley, & Guthrie, 2017). These changes to the current working environment in academia are bound to influence academics' behaviours and strategies concerning their research agendas (e.g., Brew & Lucas, 2009;Horta & Santos, 2019;Leisyte, 2016). Considering this context, the present study sought to assess how psychological traits are associated with academics' research agendas.…”

Why do academics do unfunded research? Resistance, compliance and identity in the UK neo-liberal university

“…It is also the case that while universities regard unfunded research as a budget drain and often of little weight for promotion, they benefit from it. There is evidence that, in line with the resistance theme, the more research autonomy academics feel they have, the more ambitious and innovative the research they pursue (Horta and Santos 2019). Speaking to the compliance rationale, high quality publications can result from unfunded research and clearly are submitted to the UK's REF, and several of those I spoke to said that the social contribution of their unfunded research was being developed into Impact Case Studies for REF submission.…”

The Association between Researchers’ Conceptions of Research and Their Strategic Research Agendas

“…In the ongoing race for knowledge advancement and innovation, governments and organizations face pressure to make informed decisions about how best to allocate research funds, improve current policies and incentive frameworks, and promote quality research (Vaesen & Katzav, 2017). Increasing resources are now being invested in research endeavors, leading to more knowledge being produced, even though a managerialism drive has impaired knowledge breakthroughs (Horta & Santos, 2019a). Most of our understanding of knowledge production relies on studies of research productivity and performance, both descriptive and inferential; such studies are informative and useful but are focused mostly on finalized research products such as papers and related bibliometric information complemented by demographic and institutional characteristics (Young, 2015) and additional perspectives are needed.…”