http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html Feed for Why researchers can't research en-gb http://vitae.ac.uk Never http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html Thanks Simon. I wasn't aware of any of these existing networks, so it's fascinating to know that the type of structure I was thinking of already exists in some disciplines. Yes, the REF is bound to be a barrier. Let's face it, "assessment" exercises are a root cause of much that's going wrong in research - and they're really only there for the sake of the business managers and their accountants, not for the researchers. I think it quite unlikely that when the REF is finalised, there will be many research active staff who enthusiastically welcome it as a process that's in their best interests. So the campaign to re-imagine the structure of academic research will also require a fundamental re-imagining of the REF... http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html Your suggestion might not please the accountants, Andy, but it could be argued that it's much better suited to the way that research is actually organised! Having read a lot of the responses to the REF consultation, it was striking how many university or subject associations made the point that research is often organised in joint research institutes (Guild HE), loose networks of excellence or communities of practice (Modern Universities Research Group), or organsed by sub-field rather than by institution (Media, Communication and Cultural Studies Association). Academic musicians went so far as to claim that this is the norm in their area (National Association for Music in Higher Education). They were all concerned that neither the RAE for the REF proposals took this into account, because they assume the 'unit' for evaluation purposes belongs to a single HEI. So there's another barrier to your suggestion! But if, God forbid, we were allowed to design the system purely from the perspective of researchers and the actual research, it would make perfect sense to enable people to move more freely within regional or subject-based networks. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html That's the first time I've heard much sense from the mouth of Mr. Grade... You're all right, of course. The researcher's life is blighted by the sort of short-termism which is inevitable when you get accountants and business managers, not academic specialists, running universities. And it's so well entrenched that I can't see it changing. UCU has been campaigning for years to change this culture, without succeeding. I think research jobs should be offered as permanent posts, just as most academic jobs are. This is the model that's used in the government research institutes. Unfortunately the accountants have their eye on the apparent inefficiencies of working like this, and over the last 10 years or so most of the government research centres in the UK have been either downsized, or closed altogether. I don't think there is an easy way to convince the bean-counters that adopting a similar model in the university sector will increase the efficiency of research, rather than decrease it. But perhaps this system COULD run efficiently if, rather than thinking of each university department as a self-enclosed entity, we were able to widen the networks so that different departments, even different institutions, could collaborate instead of competing. It might be possible for researchers to be redeployed, not just across a department, but across a whole region when one particular project grant comes to an end. There would have to be a critical mass of researchers and a sufficiently diverse pool of research activity in a given area, to ensure that researchers could be fitted to grants that were a good match for their skills and interests - and there'd have to be a mechanism of safeguarding the researcher's own scholarship so that they have the opportunity to make their own contribution to the network, as well as being hired help. It's not that far-fetched. Many public sector institutions (including some universities) are talking about "collaborative working" schemes where several different institutions share facilities, expertise, even redeployment pools. In most cases the driver is to save money and increase efficiency. It's a relatively small leap to think about a group of universities in a particular area (say Yorkshire, or London) forming a network in which researchers could be engaged on permanent contracts and used across the network wherever their skills could be best deployed. There will still be a need to apply for grants, but finding the right people to work on those grants could be much quicker and the benefits on researcher productivity could be enormous. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html Interesting parallel with another occupational sector where project-based work has become the norm. Here's former Chairman of the BBC Michael Grade explaining why it's important for the Beeb to maintain a stable in-house production team against the trend for outsourcing, freelancing and casualisation of employment in broadcasting: Casualisation is leading to derivative ideas. You give the commissioners what you think they want, not what you are passionately dying to make and believe in. Because you're desperate for the work. Somewhere in British broadcasting there has to be a bedrock of sustainable talent with time to think, to observe, to absorb what's going on in the world outside broadcasting and to turn that experience into programmes of challenge, ambition, quality and innovation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/speeches/stories/bpv_grade.shtml Sound familiar to researchers? http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html I too agree that the model of the research profession will be difficult to change, but now in the midst of a wavering economy is a great time for change. Corporations are restructuring, universities are reshaping, and the government is transitioning. Josef Schumpeter coined the phrase “creative destruction” (or maybe borrowed it from Karl Marx) to describe how the “old ways” in an economy are destroyed by creative processes and replaced with the “new ways”. Depressions, recessions, and general economic downturns are part of this creative process. The catalyst for change only needs to be harnessed. I hope that smarter men and women figure out how to change this profession for the better. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html Hi Sarah. You've neatly summed up the frustrations of many. It is a constant balancing act, trying to secure the next year of work while maintaining enough focus to get the job in hand done to the best of your abilities. Unfortunately it's a model that will be very difficult to change - especially in the current financial climate... http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html I think I've cited it before on this blog, but I highly recommend this book on researcher roles and identities, and (in chapter 4) on the loss of what it calls "slow times for reflection and immersion". Felt, U. (ed.) (2009) Knowing and Living in Academic Research, Prague: AV ČR. Available for download at: http://www.knowing.soc.cas.cz/static/article/data191/files/knowing_and_living_in_academic_research.pdf.pdf http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html It's a good point that there are many other pressures on us which stop us researching - the constant treadmill of applications and interviews has been on my mind recently, but mid-project I think I was just as frustrated at the admin that needed doing which also stopped me working on 'proper' research. This begs the question, of course, of what a research job really is - non-stop data analysis? Writing up? Organising focus groups? I also think you're right that it's a skill to be able to slow down and take time out to research. One colleague has just set aside (in consultation with his PI) a day a week, come what may, to read and write - this seems like a fantastic way of carving out time for research. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html I sense this is really a continuation of the discussion under the post 'I fought the law', as you've pinpointed the problem that instability and insecurity can have for research itself. I agree, which is why I'm always suspicious of the much-vaunted concept of 'researcher mobility' - new experiences can be enriching, of course, but constant mobility too often just distracts you from whatever has become your personal research agenda. I don't know if 'jobs for life' for researchers would be the answer - after all, there are plenty of other 'distracting' pressures on us, such as the pressure to publish (which is often a very poor indicator of genuine research productivity). However you do it, though, one of the most precious research skills is the knack of being able to slow down and make time for the very process of knowledge production that the naive observer might assume is the core of a researcher's job ;-) http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/273041/Why-researchers-cant-research.html