What motivates academics for external engagement? Exploring the effects of motivational drivers and organizational fairness

Atta-Owusu, Kwadwo; Fitjar, Rune Dahl

doi:10.1093/scipol/scab075

Cited by 15 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 These findings fit with other research indicating that the timeliness, relevance, presentation, and communication of research, as well as the density and quality of researcher–practitioner relationships, affect the incidence of utilization (see, e.g., Cherney et al, 2012b; Newman et al, 2016; Ouimet et al, 2010; Pizmony-Levy et al, 2021; Rose et al, 2020; Schut et al, 2014; Teirlinck et al, 2013). Researchers who are more highly motivated to see their research is used will be more likely to put in the work to make research accessible, relevant, and timely to practitioners (Atta-Owusu and Fitjar, 2021; D’Este et al, 2018). Previous survey work shows that self-reported concern with impact is positively associated with both policy outreach efforts and policy impact (Bozeman et al, 2021; Cherney et al, 2012a; Walker et al, 2019b; Weiss-Gal et al, 2017).…”

Section: Background and Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

What determines public affairs researchers’ motivations for policy impact? Results from an exploratory study

Nelson

Lindsay

2023

International Review of Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although public policy and public administration are intuitively practical fields of scholarship, much public affairs research never affects practice. Previous studies have shown that one major predictor of whether a given research study or researcher achieves impact is the researcher's motivation to do so. Using data from a survey of 409 authors of articles in major public affairs journals, we present and test models of the determinants of researchers’ use motivations with regard to specific research studies and over the course of their careers. Results indicate that previous experience as a practitioner is positively associated with perceived career-long use motivation and rewards for use associated with tenure and promotion, although not with annual evaluations. In addition, project-specific use motivation is positively associated with perceived career-long use motivation, academic age, a study suggestion made by a practitioner, and methodological contribution. Motivations based on a desire to appear productive or on suggestions from researcher colleagues are negatively associated with study-specific use. Points for practitioners Academic motivation to affect policymaking is positively associated with rewards associated with tenure and promotion, although not with year-end evaluations. Longer-serving researchers, and those with practitioner experience, report greater motivation to affect practice through their research.

show abstract

Section: Background and Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

What determines public affairs researchers’ motivations for policy impact? Results from an exploratory study

Nelson

Lindsay

2023

International Review of Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Engagement in formal activities is often rewarded with financial incentives like revenue sharing, equity or royalty sharing (van de Burgwal et al, 2019), partly because engagement in these activities results in tangible economic outcomes that can easily be quantified. However, academics are often more motivated by furthering their research and promoting its application in society, and monetary incentives may crowd out such intrinsic motivations (Atta-Owusu & Fitjar, 2022;Bregn, 2013).…”

Section: Benefits From Knowledge Exchange Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incentivizing knowledge exchange engagement: Direct and indirect benefits of external engagement

Atta Owusu,

Fitjar

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Engagement in knowledge exchange (KE) with external actors has become widely accepted as an integral mission of universities. However, research and teaching performance remain more important for career progression, while engagement activities are more weakly institutionalized. This raises the question of why academics participate in knowledge exchange engagement activities. This paper examines to what extent academics perceive that they are rewarded directly for KE by their university and to what extent they perceive to benefit in terms of their performance in other missions (research and teaching). Furthermore, we examine how these perceptions are associated with actual engagement behavior. We use data from a sample of academics in seven European universities to examine whether direct and indirect benefits from engagement are linked to engagement in a broad range of KE activities. The results suggest that direct university rewards are associated with less engagement in KE activities, while perceived indirect benefits are associated with more engagement. These relationships are particularly strong in STEM fields.

show abstract

“…More inclusive evaluation criteria that recognise a broader range of tasks that faculty members fulfil to contribute to research and scholarship would motivate their external engagement in research advancement and social contribution (Atta-Owusu & Fitjar, 2021).…”

Section: Evaluation Of Research and Servicementioning

confidence: 99%

Faculty evaluation in higher education: a theory-of-action case study in Vietnam

Nguyen¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study has two key implications. First, it suggests the improvement of faculty evaluation policymaking and implementation by revising several existing constraints and by adding some cultural and individual constraints to the current theories of action. The faculty evaluation problems could be solved by improving the quality of evaluation processes and data, reconceptualising SET and voting evaluation, and treating faculty members’ underperformance as a collective problem. Second, the study suggests a framework to predict the likely success of future intervention on faculty evaluation. For instance, faculty evaluation for learning and improvement will be more feasible if policymakers and implementers prioritise transformational purposes and make joint efforts to foster dialogues and collaboration among individuals and groups. My study also highlights the need to understand faculty evaluation, and possibly other higher education practices in Vietnam, in religious contexts and from individual participants’ spiritual values or philosophical backgrounds. The study implications are applicable to Vietnamese higher education and potentially to other educational settings with similar characteristics.

show abstract

What motivates academics for external engagement? Exploring the effects of motivational drivers and organizational fairness

Cited by 15 publications

References 58 publications

What determines public affairs researchers’ motivations for policy impact? Results from an exploratory study

What determines public affairs researchers’ motivations for policy impact? Results from an exploratory study

Incentivizing knowledge exchange engagement: Direct and indirect benefits of external engagement

Faculty evaluation in higher education: a theory-of-action case study in Vietnam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About