Search results

In this chapter, we share our top tips on writing impact for funding bids and reports. These are drawn from our extensive experience working across a UK university as research impact managers and also successfully developing and writing small to multimillion-pound grant applications for UK charity, UK Government and European funding. We have developed and delivered impact training to researchers at all career stages, written impact case studies for the UK's research assessment and published on the genre. ¹ We also lead the Impact Special Interest Group for the UK's Association of Research Managers and Administrators (ARMA) and contribute to conferences and specialist training internationally, which has included the Australasia region, Africa and Europe.

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.

This chapter addresses one of the most challenging aspects of impact, ‘how do I demonstrate that I've had an impact?’ When the topic of impact comes up, researchers want to know how they'll measure it. As not all evidence is a measurement, this chapter describes how researchers can be strategic and intentional about collecting and reporting impact evidence. As discussed in Chapter 1, a narrative approach to reporting on impact is generally used and making a case compelling is achieved with compelling evidence. Drawing on learnings from previous chapters around working with stakeholders and university systems and supports, the chapter challenges the reader to consider how they might build a compelling impact case study and provides a tool to support collecting and communicating the evidence of impact of your research. Case studies are generally utilised to demonstrate different types of evidence from various disciplines, and a template is provided for researchers to begin mapping out their impact evidence plan. Consistent with the approach of the book, it is emphasised that collecting the evidence of impact is not done in isolation or for one project and then forgotten. Rather, it is a whole career approach that is aligned with an individual philosophy of academic responsibility and identity. Being able to use excellent evidence to articulate the impact your research has generated will position the researcher to better attract additional funding to generate bigger impact in the future.

This chapter discusses practical ways that we as researchers can identify and make use of supports that will help further our research impact and advocates for making plans to include impact work from the beginning and taking advantage of opportunities and resources available. The chapter begins by encouraging you to identify your own values related to research impact and to articulate what impact you would like their research to have in the world. This ensures that impact work does not become a tick-box exercise but a meaningful, planned part of their research practice. The chapter then looks at supports – collegial and institutional – from the perspective of information science. The discussion of collegial supports makes the case that colleagues are key sources of practical information, assistance and mentorship; these connections can become information relationships and important parts of your professional network. The discussion of institutional supports makes the case that the landscape of impact can be scattered, so it is important to actively seek out information to help understand the impact environment where you are. Each discussion is accompanied with practical suggestions about how to make the most of opportunities and get the supports needed. The chapter ends with a section aimed at those who are in leadership positions to discuss what can be done to help reduce barriers and provide supports for those who are undertaking research impact projects, including helping to share information and resources about research impact, as well as acting as a mentor.

The penultimate chapter pulls together pieces of the previous eight chapters to support you in building a career-level impact plan. While the other chapters are a mix of foundational knowledge and practical approaches, this chapter is more philosophical in nature and intended to motivate the reader to bring their impact journey to life. You are encouraged to reflect on your own journey and consider what steps you might take to achieve a career that is consistent with your values and own belief in the importance of the work you do. Contributions from impactful researchers from the University of Auckland help to illustrate how diverse career pathways can be, emphasising there is no one-size-fits-all approach and that career-level impact plans need to consider personal motives and values, intersectionality, as well as disciplinary, institutional, national and international contexts. Plans need to focus on identifying opportunities to hone impact skills, finding people who can be part of your broader impact support team and working out how to strategically balance the teaching, research and service expectations placed on you as an academic. Throughout this chapter, questions prompt you to start building your own understanding of impact in the context of your career or to strategically reflect on your impact journey up to now.

Academic institutions are under increasing pressure to show that their research output has impact. As this concept is easier to quantify in science-based disciplines, this chapter reviews how one interprets what “impact” is in finance. It suggests how best to incorporate it into academic research through the use of a simple to understand impact ratio. It provides an overview of the leading academic publications and their role in this process. It asks how impact within finance is understood, appreciated and subject to critique. It concludes that academics should demonstrate how they can facilitate the development of capital markets through evidence-based policy and enhancing capital market efficiency.

University governance is constantly challenged by changing expectations and contexts. New, prestigious and well-endowed funding schemes are one possible source of pressure for change of university governance. This article analyses the impact of one such scheme, the grants of the European Research Council (ERC), on the governance of European universities. After outlining a model of how this impact on universities can be expected to occur, we present the results of an exploratory study at a very early stage of the ERC’s existence (2010–2011). The empirical analysis is based on an investigation of 11 universities in eight countries, which shows that different kinds of universities are affected in varied and often unexpected ways, with particular differences arising at different levels within the universities.