Using a Reflexive Process to Investigate Organizational Change: The Use of the Research Spider Matrix

Hanson, Ardis; Bullers, Krystal; Howard, Allison M.; Polo, Randall L.; Tomlinson, Stephanie M; Orriola, John J.

doi:10.1080/02763869.2019.1657724

“…Research careers encompass a range of roles, skills, and expertise but as the evidence suggests this is not universal, with some universities separating research active staff from colleagues such as research managers, technicians, administrators, and librarians, some of whom have research-level qualifications and experience. 41,99,158 Separation in this way could lead to inequality of how staff are included (or not), trained, mentored and perceived by fellow colleagues (see Table 4 for a summary of the key considerations associated to teamwork and supportive working relationships).…”

Section: Security and Career Progressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

F1000Res

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ‘What does the evidence say about the ‘problem’ with ‘poor’ research culture, what are the benefits of ‘good’ research culture, and what does ‘good’ look like?’ Aims To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution. Methods A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals’ well-being, career progression and performance.

show abstract

“…Recognise and value the diverse skill-set of research managerial and technical staff and provide opportunities for them to host and supervise researchers, apply for research grants and undertake research promoting the benefits of collaboration rather than competitive research culture (4,8,17,37,41,44,45,59,63,68,80,91,94,95,104,106,109,110,118,142,147,149,153,154,157,158) 5…”

Section: Security and Career Progressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research careers encompass a range of roles, skills, and expertise but as the evidence suggests this is not universal, with some universities separating research active staff from colleagues such as research managers, technicians, administrators, and librarians, some of whom have research-level qualifications and experience. (41,99,158) Separation in this way could lead to inequality of how staff are included (or not), trained, mentored and perceived by fellow colleagues (see Table 4 for a summary of the key considerations associated to teamwork and supportive working relationships). Encourage faculties to support collaborations and networks that provide a sense of mutual support and culture of team effort rather than individual competition, through interactive learning environments and faculty members as supporters and mentors (5, 19, 23, 26, 41, 43, 45, 46, 49, 59, 60, 69, 72, 73, 87-89, 92, 95, 98, 99, 101, 107, 109, 130, 141, 164, 172, 177, 178, 181, 193, 206, 212, 220-236) 51 2…”

Section: Teamwork and Supportive Working Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bring researchers together under a common goal to address specific research issues through a challenge-led (problem-led) research approach (including the health of labs) (19,45,46,57,69,73,88,89,92,98,101,158,178,224,229,239,241) Provide greater opportunities and capacity for technical and library staff to improve their own research skills through networking, collaborative partnerships and being contributors to research, including raising accessibility for multi-disciplinary teams and interaction (45,90,95,107,130,158,215,224,234,(243)(244)(245) 6…”

Section: Everyone Feeling Valued and Having Equality Of Opportunities...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ensure that those in research management and technical roles have adequate routes to continued professional development through inhouse or formal training (including ethical considerations and issues) (95,99,152,158,178,224,227,244,(246)(247)(248)(249) 7…”

Section: Everyone Feeling Valued and Having Equality Of Opportunities...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

Preprint

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ‘What does the evidence say about the ‘problem’ with ‘poor’ research culture, what are the benefits of ‘good’ research culture, and what does ‘good’ look like?’ Aims: To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution.Methods: A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results: 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions: There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals’ well-being, career progression and performance.

show abstract

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

F1000Res

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ‘What does the evidence say about the ‘problem’ with ‘poor’ research culture, what are the benefits of ‘good’ research culture, and what does ‘good’ look like?’ Aims To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution. Methods A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals’ well-being, career progression and performance.

show abstract

Using a Reflexive Process to Investigate Organizational Change: The Use of the Research Spider Matrix

Cited by 4 publications

References 10 publications

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About