Growing Research in New Universities Dr Ellen Hazelkorn IMHE/OECD, Paris and DIT, Dublin ‘Managing...
-
date post
21-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Growing Research in New Universities Dr Ellen Hazelkorn IMHE/OECD, Paris and DIT, Dublin ‘Managing...
Growing Research in New Universities
Dr Ellen HazelkornIMHE/OECD, Paris and DIT, Dublin
‘Managing the University Community -– Building a Research Strategy and Funding It’
EUA conference, Barcelona, June 2004
Themes of Presentation
Context
Institutional Research Strategy
‘Best Practice’
Policy Implications for Government and Higher Education
1. Context
For the first time, a really international world of learning, highly competitive, is emerging. If you want to get into that orbit, you have to do so on merit. You cannot rely on politics or anything else. . .
Research is a core element of the mission of higher education. The extent to which higher education institutions are engaged in research and development activities has a key role in determining the status and the quality of these institutions and the contribution, which they make to economic and social development.
HE Research as Economic Driver
Global knowledge-economy → Strategic importance of national research strategy
National and regional development → production of new knowledge, knowledge transfer and economic performance
Role and mission of HE → task of growing research capability and capacity no longer optional
Innovation, application and knowledge specialization competitive advantage and performance
Institutional Context
National and regional economy
Institutional history and development
Research experience, capability and capacity
HE system and role of individual HEIs
Challenges of Growing Research
Poor institutional infrastructure
Limited scale and critical mass
Academic staff often without necessary prerequisites
Not traditionally resourced for research
Academic workload tensions
New disciplines without research tradition
2. Institutional Research Strategy
‘Sustain academic and professional reputation in knowledge-based economy’
‘Align academic activities with economic development of region’
‘Retain and improve position’
‘Attract and retain high quality faculty and students’
‘Maintain cutting-edge curriculum’ and ‘create stimulating learning environment’
Why do Research?
Identifying Institutional Goals
Research informed
Research based
Research active
Research led
Research intensive
Strategic Planning and Priority-setting
Shape what should do, not simply what can or are best equipped to do
Optimal use of scarce resources (financial, human and physical)
Align institutional competencies with external environment and national aspirations
Balance existing capability with potential and opportunities
Priority-setting Process
Centralised or top-down: priorities and funding are determined by Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research
De-centralised or bottom-up: priorities set by individual researchers or departments
Combination: priorities set via involvement of different vertical levels of university personnel, boards and groups
Identifying Objectives
To grow research capability and capacity
To ensure strong research-teaching nexus
To link research to wider societal responsibilities
To increase and allocate resources to facilitate productivity and reward excellence
To establish research clusters/centres of excellence
To enhance institutional status and mission
Identifying Priorities
Applied research Industry-related Basic research
Institutional significance Collaboration Interdisciplinary Regional or local significance New or emerging domain Creative practice
Defining Research
‘Our main focus is applied research…with outcomes in consulting and experimental production.’
‘We normally use the term research and other scholarly activities…’
‘For government, we distinguish between basic and applied research and development. However, our activities are so diversified …’
‘Our research strategy is built around making a difference to all R&D partners – be they enterprises, industry sectors, government or communities. . .’
Widening the Definition of Research
Basic vs applied
Disciplinary vs interdisciplinary (Mode 1 vs Mode 2)
Professional and creative practice
Knowledge and technology transfer
Research vs Scholarship – Research and Scholarship?
Organizing Research (1)
T = R Inclusive departments
T & R Departments + units/centres
T R Departments + autonomous centres
T R University + autonomous institutes
Organising Research (2)
Determining the teaching and research nexus
Distinguishing between ‘discipline oriented’ and
‘problem solving’ research
Linking research/commercialisation to society via
boundary-crossing units
Building collaborative research teams with other
universities, research labs, industry, organisations, etc.
Building Competence
Recruit
Re-invigorate
Train
Re-orient
Enable
Incentives and Rewards
Greater research time
Targeted grants
Promotional opportunities
Enhanced facilities
Internships with industry or other partners
Salary increases
Sabbatical leave
Research Office
Professional One-stop Shop
Financial and budget advice
Identify funding opportunities
Project preparation
Project management
Research training and mentoring
Ph.D. programmes
Intellectual property and commercialisation advice
Financing Research
Government funding is declining
Rise in competitive external funding
Diversify funding base
Income generation via consultancy, services,
commercialisation, IP
Investment strategies
Resource Allocation Model
Criteria influenced by national/international benchmarks
Institute or faculty assessment panels
Peer-review publications, research income, citations, PhDs
Role of professional or creative practice? consultancy?
Formulaic funding to match institutional/national objectives and priorities
Difficulties Encountered
Institutional ethos
Rigidity or lack of flexibility
Faculty response
Funding
Numbers of researchers
Speed by which decisions implemented
Evaluation process
3. ‘Best Practice’
What Works
Director/Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research
Research office
Research strategy and management plan
Priority-setting and evaluation process
Research units/centres with special resources
Indicative Research Structure
V-P Research
Research StrategyCommittee
Research OfficeTechnology Transfer
Office
Research Centres and Units
Science Parks and Incubator Centres
Graduate Students
Research Active Faculty
Targeted Approach
Invest
Aggressive use of performance indicators
Limited number of research priorities
Research teams/centres
‘Graduate School’
Strategic alliances and collaboration
Align funding, recruitment, etc. to priorities
Building a ‘Culture of Scholarship’
Not everyone needs to be involved in research
Policies should enhance nexus between research and teaching
Range of services, awards and rewards to encourage and facilitate research should be introduced
Wider definition of scholarship, rather than a traditional dichotomous view of basic and applied, would provide more encouraging environment
Strategic Choices
Recruit or grow?
T+R vs T/R?
Research culture vs culture of scholarship?
Individual researchers vs research teams?
Targeted/niche vs seed-corn/universal funding?
Institutional funding vs competitive funding?
Decentralised vs centralised management structure?
Process of Growing Research
Context Strategy Organisation
Global knowledge economy
National & regional economy
HE system & investment
HEI history & experience
Evaluation & benchmarking
Strategic plan & priority setting
Match competences with niche
Investment strategy
Align funding, recruitment to priorities
RAM
Alliances & collaboration
V-P Research
Research & KT/TT Office
Research teams & centres
‘Science parks’
Graduate School
HR policies
Infrastructure
Government vs HEI Mission? Teaching vs Research vs Scholarship? World-class vs National vs Region; S&T vs SS&H
4. Policy Implications for Government and Higher Education
Two Scenarios
Few research universities concentrate all world class research across all disciplines; rest concentrate on undergraduate or professional teaching with limited locally relevant applied research.
Spread of teaching and research excellence with universities as ‘main proximity knowledge providers’ driven to specialise because of relevance and competences.
Late-developers and Newcomers
Barriers or restricted barriers to entry
Disadvantages of starting late from poor base
Market forces devastating impact on late developer or newcomer
Close relationship between policymakers and dominant groups
Criteria and rules for research funding are antipathetic to new HEIs
Policy Initiatives (1)
Underpin and build on diverse university missions in research and innovation
Enhance regional/spatial strategy: innovation networks, learning regions, community engagement
Widen funding metrics to support research (basic and applied), creative/professional practice, knowledge and technology transfer
Investment strategy to grow research capability and capacity
Policy Initiatives (2)
‘Head-start’ grants to overcome late development
Target staff development, mobility and HR strategies
Support research training and career development Strengthen institutional/research management and
leadership
Principal Conclusions
Important challenges impeding late-developers and newcomers
Market conditions not sufficient to meet/overcome challenges
New knowledge production requires new structures & frameworks
Role of government and policy instruments is critical
Barriers to entry rising
Gap widening between ‘research rich’ and ‘research poor’
www.oecd.org/edu/higher