Search results

This chapter compares research management and administration (RMA) associations worldwide and the existing professional development frameworks (PDFs) for RMAs. The comparison is based on a study of 22 national, European Union (EU), and international RMA associations/networks which was carried out between April and June 2020 and revised in 2022; it aims at providing a comprehensive overview of skills and competences of RMAs as a profession to enable worldwide benchmarking and analysis.

The benchmarking analysis could provide useful information for those working on the development of professional frameworks training targeted at RMAs, or the recognition of RMA as a profession.

Starting in the late 1950s with the creation of the National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA), followed by the formation of other professional organisations both in the USA and Europe, there was a growing sense that research management was indeed a profession. One goal was the creation of professional standards that would lead to a standard training curriculum and, ultimately, a professional credential, and there have been many attempts at developing research administration certification. Now, in the US, accreditation through the Research Administrators Certification Council (RACC) exam has become ubiquitous, whereas in other parts of the world, certification by portfolio is more common. This chapter will compare and contrast the salient features of certification, certificates, and degree programs in research administration and review their development and growth over the past 30 years. The chapter will discuss their relative merits and how they work to advance the profession of research administration.

Faced with the existential threat of COVID-19, the College of Business Administration (CBA) at Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University (PNU) decided to work toward the dual goals to achieve accreditation and an effective social and educational response to the pandemic. CBA’s quality improvement process was implemented synergistically with Seligman’s (2011) PERMA well-being model, namely positive emotions, engagement, relationship, meaning, and accomplishment/achievement. The case study methodology, which was based on direct observations, faculty and students’ interviews, surveys, feedback, documents, and archival data records, allowed to capture the context and lived reality of all the participants in QAA processes. Results showed that quality improvement was facilitated through three domains: (1) governance and academic leadership, (2) teaching and learning, and (3) digitalization and technology. Within each domain, specific programs, activities, human resources, and networks were enabled through a framework based on the PERMA well-being model. As a result of this hybrid QAA well-being implementation process, CBA achieved NCAAA accreditation for its offered programs, while experiencing high levels of well-being and commitment to teaching and learning by the staff members and students. The description of CBA’s accreditation journey might be insightful for other higher education institutions (HEIs).

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting has been widely accepted as a vital tool for communicating with stakeholders on a range of social, environmental, and governance issues, but how companies define, interpret, apply, integrate, and communicate their CSR efforts and impacts in corporate reporting is anything but a straightforward task. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the concept of materiality in CSR reporting and demonstrate practical examples of good CSR and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reporting practices. We chose the aviation industry because of its economic relevance, constant growth, and future expected changes in the aftermath of COVID-19. In addition, airlines affect many of the SDGs directly and indirectly with contending results. This chapter is timely because of the growing willingness by companies to integrate CSR and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) thinking into the corporate strategy and business operations using materiality assessment and enhancing their competitive advantage and ability to maintain long-term value and because ESG and ethical investing have become part of the mainstream investing. Thus, this chapter contributes to an understanding of the wide range of existing and new reporting frameworks and regulations and reinforces the importance of discussing how this diversity of approaches can affect the work toward worldwide comparability of CSR and sustainability reporting.