Understanding outcomes and gathering evidence

Luke Georghiou

University of Manchester

Outline

• Why does a university need to demonstrate impact?

• Dimensions of impact and its pathways

• Measurement issues and the politicians’ fallacy

• Driving, demonstrating and communicating impact

• A few words on REF and impact

• Concluding remarks

Why does a university need to demonstrate impact from research

• To meet the demands of accountability in an environment of public management and competition for resources – REF is a measure not an end-goal

• To demonstrate to stakeholders (regional and national) that the resources it receives lead to broad societal benefit

• To satisfy the expectations of researchers that their work where possible contributes to the economy, society and culture

• To do better research as a result of the networks, challenges and knowledge that engagement with society brings

• To create an ethos which is part of its educational goals and ultimately increases the employability and societal contribution of its graduates

Dimensions of impact – the underlying dichotomy

• Research as investment – Funding justified in terms of the returns it offers to society

– May be monetised or non-monetised

– Short-term and specific or long term and generic

– Economic (jobs, growth…) or social (societal challenges, policies….)

• Research as consumption – Justified in terms of cultural and educational value

– Analogous to reasons for support of opera/theatre/arts

Key pathways to impact apply in both economic and social dimensions

Pathways Economic Social

Increasing stock of knowledge through publication

Commercialised intellectual property

Cumulative knowledge applied eg in policy advice

Training skilled people Formal education & tacit knowledge acquired through research and transferred through contact & mobility

Creating new instrumentation & methodologies

www from CERN NMR from analytical chemistry to non-invasive medical diagnostics

Collaboration & networking with users

Coproduction of knowledge with users in the context of economic and societal challenges

Origins of an impact may be obscure

• Timescales for impact may be long

• Systematic information may not have been collected on the way

• Researchers may have moved on from institutions creating at least two units of analysis

Attributing effects to research is not always obvious

• Origins of an impact may come from multiple research events and researchers

• A single research event may have multiple impacts and these are not necessarily known by the researcher

Measuring impact – the big picture

• Economic evidence supports the case for research – Range of studies show overall value generated by research is 3-8 times

the initial investment over full lifecycle

– Median values for annual rate of return 20-50%

– Leverage from public to private R&D

• Evidence appears to be insufficient for political argument to be undisputed

• Politicians’ dilemma – why are austerity cuts made to research? – Benefits perceived to be long term and hence expenditure here less

likely to have effect on jobs and growth in current political cycle

– While global benefits of R&D are undisputed, these accrue to the leading performers and are not of the same order for followers

Politicians’ fallacy

• The politicians’ dilemma is also the politicians’ double fallacy

• Benefits are not only long term – Arise from daily interactions of researchers with current business &

societal challenges

– From the training and tacit knowledge that comes from such interactions, and

– From the ground research prepares for the adaption and absorption of disruptive innovations

• No region need be insulated from the benefits of research and no sector can survive in the long run without new knowledge – Performing research keeps peripheral regions in touch and provides a

window on the world

Building impact

• What makes a particular piece of research have impact?

– Intrinsic potential sometimes called timeliness and promise

– Effective knowledge transfer/exchange (eventually!)

– Absorptive capacity of users

– Non-research factors which make the innovation successful and/or effective (significance & reach?)

• Also require infrastructures for impact…

Infrastructure is important

• Developing regional innovation system and “Corridor” with multiple incubation & accommodation increasingly specialised

• Vectors – Policy@Manchester

– Academic Health Sciences Networks

• Cultural institutions – Art gallery, Museum, Historic library

– Jodrell Bank Science Centre

• Expertise in business engagement, commercialisation, market analysis

Aligning behavioural incentives

• Challenge for universities to align individual incentives with new drivers

– In Manchester we explicitly offer parity of esteem for applied research with curiosity-driven research for impact-generating, translation and knowledge transfer activities in promotion and PDR

– Encourage outside work subject to regulations

– Radical IP policy offering 85% initial share to originators up to £1m then 50%

• Annual staff research profiling exercise includes impact as well as outputs and research income

Building the regional innovation ecosystem

• Even for a research-intensive institution our future is tied to the prosperity and reputation of city where situated

• Almost all universities have a name which reflects their location

• Actively engaged through: – Attracting and building key infrastructure in

graphene, advanced materials , life sciences, digital …

– Working in close partnership with local government and the health service to provide a unitary offering to address the population

– Ensuring graduates have both entrepreneurial and specialist skills even at doctoral level

A few words on REF and impact

• Should be clear that REF impact cases present a partial picture which only gives a glimpse of the whole from fragments

• It largely disconnects the holistic model of a university in which the flow of people is a key vector of research

• Nonetheless validated stories are crucial in making the case for research and in future in transferring the skills involved in impact

Capturing impact

• Recognition

– What transforms well-engaged academics into an ‘impact case’?

• Underlying model or pathway

– Necessary to understand is it linear/ interactive/reservoir etc?

• Rules of evidence

– Paper trail (or more likely electronic) in real time or retrospective

– Testimonials and the psychology of credit

Concluding remarks – what a university can do to be more impactful

1. Build impact into the highest level goals and mission of the institution

2. Accept that not all research will/should have impact but that where potential exists we have a duty to realise it

3. Cascade incentives down to the individual researcher through promotion and esteem

4. Put in place an internal infrastructure to facilitate the conditions that lead to impact

5. Ensure that impact is captured and communicated externally

6. Influence the external conditions to amplify the impact by sharing responsibility for developing the innovation ecosystem in which it works

You are very welcome to come and see for yourselves during ESOF 2016 in July next year!

www.esof.eu

Thank you!