Books and journals Case studies Expert Briefings Open Access
Advanced search

Search results

1 – 10 of over 209000
Content available
Article
Publication date: 29 January 2021

How to enhance scholarly impact: recommendations for university administrators, researchers and educators

Herman Aguinis, Larry Yu and Cevat Tosun

The purpose of this study is to examine scholarly impact which is critical to universities in their aspiration to create, disseminate and apply knowledge. However…

Open Access
HTML
PDF (214 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to examine scholarly impact which is critical to universities in their aspiration to create, disseminate and apply knowledge. However, scholarly impact is an elusive concept. First, the authors present a conceptual model to clarify different dimensions of scholarly impact (i.e. theory and research, education, organizations and society) and four key stakeholders (i.e. other researchers, students, practitioners and policy makers). Second, the authors provide actionable recommendations for university administrators, researchers and educators on how to enhance impact. The scholarly impact model is flexible, expandable, scalable and adaptable to universities in different regions of the world and with different strategic priorities.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors conducted a general review of the literature and offered a multidimensional and multistakeholder model of scholarly impact to guide future actions aimed at enhancing scholarly impact.

Findings

The authors describe the multidimensional and multistakeholder nature of the critical and yet elusive concept of scholarly impact. The authors delineate multiple dimensions of impact, different stakeholders involved and recommendations for enhancing scholarly impact in the future.

Practical implications

The authors offer practical and actionable recommendations on how to enhance scholarly impact. For university administrators, the authors recommend aligning scholarly impact goals with actions and resource-allocation decisions; ensuring that performance management and reward systems are consistent with impact goals; being strategic in selecting a journal list; developing a strong doctoral program; and promoting practical knowledge and applications. For researchers and educators, the authors recommend developing a personal scholarly impact plan; becoming an academic decathlete; finding ways to affect multiple impact dimensions simultaneously; and leveraging social media to broaden impact on external stakeholders. Implementing these recommendations will benefit other researchers, students, practitioners (e.g. managers, consultants) and policy makers.

Originality/value

The authors provide an innovative way of conceptualizing scholarly impact. In turn, the conceptual analysis results in actionable recommendations for university administrators, researchers and educators to enhance impact.

Details

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2020-1189
ISSN: 0959-6119

Keywords

  • Research impact
  • External stakeholders
  • Research practicality
  • Internal stakeholders

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 9 November 2020

Knowledge with Impact in Higher Education Research

Vassiliki Papatsiba and Eliel Cohen

Responding to the knowledge needs of stakeholders has been a defining feature of higher education research. However important responsiveness is, it does not automatically…

HTML
PDF (688 KB)
EPUB (2.9 MB)

Abstract

Responding to the knowledge needs of stakeholders has been a defining feature of higher education research. However important responsiveness is, it does not automatically assume beneficial change of policy or practice as a result. When research generates impact beyond the academy, little is known about its epistemic, organisational and temporal characteristics and their links. Are these knowledge characteristics a typical reflection of the field or do they have a certain specificity that may account for their reach into the wider spheres of policy and practice and society at large? In this chapter, we look at the knowledge characteristics of higher education research that was submitted for the ‘impact’ element of the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF 2014) – the United Kingdom's national level assessment of research. We identified 53 impact case studies within a broadly defined and multidisciplinary field of higher education research. We investigate the theories and methodologies used, the researchers and institutions that conducted the research, its sponsors and the timescales of the various research projects. In the United Kingdom, the REF includes assessment of nonacademic impact. The latter has emerged as a key criterion and a metric for evaluating and funding academic research. We contribute a sociological conceptualisation of the knowledge characteristics and their links as an ‘epistemic-organisational-temporal nexus’ at which actors' interests intersect. This conceptual framework advances our understanding of the investigated multidisciplinary research field, with relevance to applied social sciences generally.

Details

Theory and Method in Higher Education Research
Type: Book
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S2056-375220200000006013
ISBN: 978-1-80043-321-2

Keywords

  • Research impact
  • research assessment
  • higher education policy
  • interests
  • sociology of knowledge
  • Research Excellence Framework

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 9 September 2019

Closing the researcher-practitioner gap: An exploration of the impact of an AHRC networking grant

Hazel Hall, Peter Cruickshank and Bruce Ryan

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which learning gained through participation in three research methods workshops funded by an Arts and Humanities…

HTML
PDF (226 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which learning gained through participation in three research methods workshops funded by an Arts and Humanities Research Council networking grant was applied in practice.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected by online survey and focus group from individuals who participated in the Developing Research Excellence and Methods (DREaM) project workshops in 2011/2012. The survey data were coded and analysed manually, as were the transcribed focus group discussions.

Findings

Following the conclusion of the DREaM project the participants at the core of the network applied their learning from the workshops to innovate in the workplace and to develop information services, with evident impact on end-users of library and information services. The strongest impact of the DREaM project, however, was found in reports of widened opportunities for the researcher and practitioner cadre members, many of which arose from collaborations. This provides evidence of a second proven strategy (in addition to the provision of research reports in practitioner publications) for narrowing the library and information science (LIS) research-practice gap: the creation of researcher-practitioner networks.

Research limitations/implications

Collaborative interactions between academic researchers and practitioners bring benefits to both network participants themselves and to the wider communities with which they interact. These are likely to be applicable across a range of subject domains and geographies.

Practical implications

Network grants are valuable for furnishing learning that may be applied in practice, and for bridging the research-practice gap.

Social implications

In LIS and other domains that suffer from a research-practice gap (e.g. teaching, social work, nursing, policing, management) the bringing together of researchers and practitioners in networks may address problems associated with misunderstandings between the two communities, and lead to improved services provision.

Originality/value

This study provides an evaluation of network development that goes beyond simply reporting changes in network topology. It does so by assessing the value that network relationships provide to individuals and groups, extending knowledge on mechanisms of collaborative interaction within research networks. It is also the first detailed study of the impact of a UK research council networking grant.

Details

Journal of Documentation, vol. 75 no. 5
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-12-2018-0212
ISSN: 0022-0418

Keywords

  • Collaboration
  • Research
  • Skills
  • Librarians
  • Research methods
  • Communities
  • Practitioners

Content available
Article
Publication date: 4 December 2017

Revisiting impact in the context of workplace research: a review and possible directions

Tony Wall, Lawrence Bellamy, Victoria Evans and Sandra Hopkins

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the scholarly impact agenda in the context of work-based and workplace research, and to propose new directions for research and practice.

Open Access
HTML
PDF (225 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the scholarly impact agenda in the context of work-based and workplace research, and to propose new directions for research and practice.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper combines a contemporary literature review with case vignettes and reflections from practice to develop more nuanced understandings, and highlights future directions for making sense of impact in the context of work-based learning research approaches.

Findings

This paper argues that three dimensions to making sense of impact need to be more nuanced in relation to workplace research: interactional elements of workplace research processes have the potential for discursive pathways to impact, presence (and perhaps non-action) can act as a pathway to impact, and the narrative nature of time means that there is instability in making sense of impact over time.

Research limitations/implications

The paper proposes a number of implications for practitioner-researchers, universities/research organisations, and focusses on three key areas: the amplification of research ethics in workplace research, the need for axiological shifts towards sustainability and the need to explicate axiological orientation in research.

Originality/value

This paper offers a contemporary review of the international impact debate in the specific context of work-based and workplace research approaches.

Details

Journal of Work-Applied Management, vol. 9 no. 2
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-07-2017-0018
ISSN: 2205-2062

Keywords

  • Impact
  • Research method
  • Dialogic impact
  • Reflexive impact
  • Temporal impact
  • Workplace research

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 14 May 2018

Bridging the gap between domain of research and locus of impact: An examination of the UK’s Research Excellence Framework

Rekha Rao-Nicholson, Peter Rodgers and Zaheer Khan

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relevance of academic research in the business and management studies stream to various stakeholders. The stakeholder theory is…

HTML
PDF (251 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relevance of academic research in the business and management studies stream to various stakeholders. The stakeholder theory is used to examine the influence of research on various key beneficiaries and investigate the link between the domain of research and locus of impact.

Design/methodology/approach

Research Excellence Framework 2014 (REF 2014) conducted in the UK provides a useful context and data for our research as REF 2014 encouraged universities to submit the information on research activities and their beneficiaries. This information is in the form of impact case studies which details the research, location of research and beneficiaries.

Findings

The findings suggest that research with an international focus has a positive impact on industry stakeholders, especially multinational corporations as well as non-governmental organizations. Second, it shows how research has made a commercial impact in innovation and small and medium enterprises’ growth while having limited impact on other domains such as social, legal, political and healthcare. More broadly, the findings indicate the degree of regional diversity. Also, the wider results-driven agenda in the UK can overestimate the research contribution to some stakeholders in the society.

Research limitations/implications

Self-selection bias as universities might submit only few case studies.

Practical implications

For research to generate long-term benefits for the wider society, it needs to engage more deeply with the whole range of stakeholders.

Originality/value

This study contributes to understanding how research is consumed by stakeholders. The results indicate that while locally relevant research encourages local consumption; it is not assimilated across various stakeholders.

Details

Journal of Management Development, vol. 37 no. 4
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-02-2017-0051
ISSN: 0262-1711

Keywords

  • Practice
  • Stakeholder theory
  • Research impact
  • Rigour relevance

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 10 October 2017

“Impact”, research and slaying Zombies: the pressures and possibilities of the REF

Robert MacDonald

The purpose of this paper is to reflect critically upon current debates and tensions in the governance of research in the UK and more widely, particularly the imperative…

HTML
PDF (189 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to reflect critically upon current debates and tensions in the governance of research in the UK and more widely, particularly the imperative that social science research should demonstrate impact beyond the academy.

Design/methodology/approach

Drawing implicitly upon the Bevir’s theory of governance, the paper positions discourses about “research excellence and research impact” as elite narratives that are rooted genealogically in forms of managerial audit culture which seek to govern the practices of social science academics. The paper reviews relevant literature, draws upon key contributions that have shaped debate and refers to the author’s own research and experiences of “research impact”.

Findings

Initiatives such as the UK’s “Research Excellence Framework” can be understood as a form of governance that further enables already present neo-liberalising tendencies in the academy. The “impact agenda” has both negative (e.g. it can distort research priorities and can lead to overstatement of “real world” effects) and positive potential (e.g. to provide institutional space for work towards social justice, in line with long-standing traditions of critical social science and “public sociology”).

Research limitations/implications

There is a need for more critical research and theoretical reflection on the value, threats, limitations and potential of current forms of research governance and “impact”.

Originality/value

To date, there are very few article-length, critical discussions of these developments and issues in research governance, even fewer that connect these debates to longer-standing radical imperatives in social science.

Details

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 37 no. 11-12
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-04-2016-0047
ISSN: 0144-333X

Keywords

  • Research impact
  • Social policy
  • Research governance
  • Research excellence framework

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 2 August 2013

A CERIF‐based schema for recording research impact

Richard Gartner, Mark Cox and Keith Jeffery

The need for a more structured methodology than currently exists for describing the impact of academic research is widely acknowledged. The most widely used research…

HTML
PDF (638 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The need for a more structured methodology than currently exists for describing the impact of academic research is widely acknowledged. The most widely used research information standard, CERIF, does not currently allow the encoding of research impact in a structured way: this project devised and tested an extension to CERIF to address this omission. The paper seeks to discuss these points.

Design/methodology/approach

The core methodology of the project is a series of extensions to the CERIF model to encode “impact statements”, indicators of impact and measures as evidence for them. These can be linked to persons, organisational units or research outputs. This model is supported by a small semantic taxonomy of indicators and measures. The model was tested by evaluating it against current information environments, and by assessing its compatibility with CERIF and non‐CERIF compliant current research information systems.

Findings

Despite some concerns expressed about the validity of reducing qualitative evidence of impact to atomistic measures, and about a general paucity of such data in existing systems, the model tested well against working environments. It offers the potential for reducing workloads and more continuous assessment of research impact within its stakeholder communities.

Originality/value

No substantive methodology for encoding impact statements existed in CERIF prior to this project. In addition, the atomistic, quantifiable approach to describing impact is relatively unexplored in the higher education community, but offers substantial advantages. The work is of relevance to research managers, developers, system designers and metadata specialists.

Details

The Electronic Library, vol. 31 no. 4
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-11-2011-0156
ISSN: 0264-0473

Keywords

  • Research information management
  • Metadata
  • Research impact
  • Research assessment
  • Higher education

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 29 July 2013

Supply chain management research impact: an evidence‐based perspective

Christine M. Harland

The purpose of this paper, using an evidence‐based management theoretical lens, is to examine research impact to provide guidance to supply chain management academics in…

HTML
PDF (339 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper, using an evidence‐based management theoretical lens, is to examine research impact to provide guidance to supply chain management academics in evidencing and exploiting the outputs, outcomes and impact of their research.

Design/methodology/approach

Evidence‐based management theory is examined and applied to types of academic research impact. The distinction between academic and non‐academic impact is developed into a supply chain framework of research outputs, transfer, outcomes, impact and national/international benefits. Impact of supply chain management research is explored through a case study in the English National Health Service. Future opportunities and challenges for supply chain management researchers arising from increasing demand for and supply of evidence are discussed.

Findings

Author academic impact and citations are found to be increasingly important building blocks of evidence‐based evaluations of individual academics, journals, research quality assessments of groups and universities, and global rankings of universities. Supply chain management researchers can compare their impact with other areas of academia. Non‐academic impact of research has been assessed by funders of research projects and has spread to research quality assessments of universities.

Social implications

Bibliometrics provide evidence of author and journal impact that can be used in human resource decisions, research quality assessments and global rankings of universities; this availability enables a debate on appropriate use of academic impact evidence. Supply chain management academics evidencing non‐academic research impact on business, society and economy will enable governments and funders of research to evaluate value for money return on their investment.

Originality/ value

This perspective of evidence‐based evaluation of research impact and its implications might encourage debate on academic and non‐academic impact and encourage supply chain researchers to consider evidencing impact in their research design and methodology.

Details

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, vol. 18 no. 5
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2013-0108
ISSN: 1359-8546

Keywords

  • Supply chain management
  • Research work
  • Journals
  • Universities
  • Research impact
  • Evidence‐based management
  • Author impact
  • Journal impact
  • Research quality assessment
  • University rankings
  • Applied research
  • Non‐academic impact

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 18 March 2019

Supply chain management scholar’s research impact: moderated mediation analysis

Yucheng Zhang, Yenchun Jim Wu, Mark Goh and Xinhong Liu

The purpose of this paper is to draw on social capital theory to develop a model to explain the determinants of a supply chain management scholar’s academic research impact.

HTML
PDF (483 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to draw on social capital theory to develop a model to explain the determinants of a supply chain management scholar’s academic research impact.

Design/methodology/approach

Drawing from a database of 450 supply chain management scholars in different countries collected from ResearchGate and the World Bank, the bootstrapping method was applied on the moderated mediation analysis.

Findings

Analysis of the mediating role of a scholar’s social capital suggests that social capital theory has a strong explanatory power on the relationship between a scholar’s research skill and academic impact. To account for the boundary effect at the country-level, the authors further examine if this mechanism differs by country in the supply chain management research context.

Research limitations/implications

The findings from this study are from a single research area, which limits the generalizability of the study. Although the data are collected from different sources, including ResearchGate and the World Bank, it is cross-sectional in nature. The variables in this model do not have strong causal relationships.

Practical implications

The results suggest that supply chain management scholars can reap the benefits of their social capital. Specifically, scholars can enhance their academic impact by increasing their social capital.

Originality/value

The results provide a reference for supply chain management scholars keen on enhancing their academic research impact. It also provides a reference to explain why country-level differences can influence these scholars.

Details

Library Hi Tech, vol. 37 no. 1
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-07-2017-0149
ISSN: 0737-8831

Keywords

  • Social media
  • Social capital
  • Universities
  • Research
  • Analysis
  • Bibliographies

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 17 November 2014

Interrelationships between theory and research impact: Views from a survey of UK academics

Gary D. Holt, Jack Goulding and Akintola Akintoye

Of late within the UK, government funded research has emphasised “impact” as a prerequisite for financial support, while the Research Excellence Framework (REF) now also…

HTML
PDF (376 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

Of late within the UK, government funded research has emphasised “impact” as a prerequisite for financial support, while the Research Excellence Framework (REF) now also includes impact as an assessment criterion. The purpose of this paper is to investigate perceptions of the construction management research (CMR) community on “impact”, especially, in relation to its possible future interrelationships with theory generation and development, research design and research outputs.

Design/methodology/approach

A mixed methods design employs a structured questionnaire survey of CMR academics to collect numeric (scaled) and qualitative (narrative) data. These are analysed using graphical, descriptive statistical and informal content analysis techniques to examine perceptions and inference.

Findings

There is a self-reported high understanding of impact and theory as separate concepts, but variance among perceptions as to their interrelationships. In addition, there is greater acceptance of the role of impact relating to research grants, but less so in relation to the REF. Respondents were ambivalent regarding possible effects, that an increasing emphasis on impact may have for the future. There was “slight agreement” that impact was good for CMR and, that existing theory must always be considered in research design.

Research limitations/implications

The contribution of this study adds empirical evidence to the ongoing debate regarding the “emerging” role of research impact within the UK; to some extent generally, and with respect to the CMR community more specifically.

Originality/value

The empirical findings are entirely novel.

Details

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 21 no. 6
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-06-2013-0052
ISSN: 0969-9988

Keywords

  • Construction management
  • Academic views
  • Impact
  • Research design
  • Theory

Access
Only content I have access to
Only Open Access
Year
  • Last week (718)
  • Last month (2097)
  • Last 3 months (5297)
  • Last 6 months (10616)
  • Last 12 months (20521)
  • All dates (209874)
Content type
  • Article (171372)
  • Book part (28212)
  • Earlycite article (7505)
  • Case study (1462)
  • Expert briefing (1260)
  • Executive summary (35)
  • Graphic analysis (28)
1 – 10 of over 209000
Emerald Publishing
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
© 2021 Emerald Publishing Limited

Services

  • Authors Opens in new window
  • Editors Opens in new window
  • Librarians Opens in new window
  • Researchers Opens in new window
  • Reviewers Opens in new window

About

  • About Emerald Opens in new window
  • Working for Emerald Opens in new window
  • Contact us Opens in new window
  • Publication sitemap

Policies and information

  • Privacy notice
  • Site policies
  • Modern Slavery Act Opens in new window
  • Chair of Trustees governance statement Opens in new window
  • COVID-19 policy Opens in new window
Manage cookies

We’re listening — tell us what you think

  • Something didn’t work…

    Report bugs here

  • All feedback is valuable

    Please share your general feedback

  • Member of Emerald Engage?

    You can join in the discussion by joining the community or logging in here.
    You can also find out more about Emerald Engage.

Join us on our journey

  • Platform update page

    Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

  • Questions & More Information

    Answers to the most commonly asked questions here