I thought I'd dig up this old thread as I have a closely related query for everyone:

I originally mentioned that I was co-editing a book about research impact. Well, I 
still am (the glacial pace of academic publishing...). Now, my chapter in this book 
is about achieving impact as a qualified academic who happens to be under-employed 
(thankfully now based on past experience, not current circumstances). As Eric Clapton 
put it, 'nobody knows you when you're down and out', so I'm writing about ways to 
access policymakers (and/or other relevant decision-makers) and present your research 
even if you're not leading a big important research project and don't have extensive 
institutional backup.

With my chapter, I've got (I think) some interesting things to say about my own 
experience achieving impact whilst 'between jobs' (ahem), with some research I was 
doing on Welsh language policy. I managed to get an audience with a group of senior 
policymakers, just by striking up a polite email conversation with a senior civil 
servant. That led on to another opportunity to present the same work to another group 
of policy wonks. All in all, pretty impacty for a bit of a nobody!

So, my question for all of you, in your various national/local contexts: how can a 
down-and-out academic similarly go about the business of achieving something as 
highfalutin as impact? I'm not only asking about influencing government. Impact is a 
feather of many hues. Impact could include influencing practitioners relevant to your 
field of research, e.g teachers, legal professionals, journalists, tinkers, tailors, 
soldiers, spies. It could also involve perhaps staging public awareness events based 
on your findings, or getting your message out via mass media.

What I am not asking is for is the general advice I was seeking in my original email 
below (in 2012), which was more about how professional researchers can achieve 
impact. I'm asking here specifically about people who would listen to you if you just 
have a PhD and a good idea, not an academic job. I managed to find such people in the 
Welsh Government; I'm hoping they exist in other governments and other areas of 
society besides (in the UK and elsewhere).

And for patiently reading all this on a Good Friday, your reward is that Clapton song 
I mentioned earlier:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvXo2f4q4_Y

Thanks in advance for any tips!

All the best,
Dave

--
Dr. Dave Sayers
Senior Lecturer, Dept Humanities, Sheffield Hallam University, UK
Honorary Research Fellow, Arts & Humanities, Swansea University, UK
[log in to unmask] | http://swansea.academia.edu/DaveSayers



On 29/03/2012 08:50, Dave Sayers wrote:
> [Re-sending in plain text, as the HTML version got mangled in the digest email.]
>
> Hello again one and all,
>
> What a fine day it is to be unemployed. That is to say, I didn't get the job.
> Nevertheless, your excellent advice kept me from flailing and dribbling completely
> inadequately into my notes, and so they hopefully won't feel too aggrieved covering
> my travel expenses.
>
> Now, I promised a roundup of the aforementioned excellent advice, so here goes, in no
> particular order, entirely anonymised, and mixed in with my own reflections.
>
> People do indeed feel pressure from funders to emphasise impact; however, less so
> from individual referees, for whom it hasn't featured as a crucial deciding element.
> This is a long-standing dilemma I suppose: just whose muffins are we supposed to be
> buttering? Those of our peers, or those of our funding overlords? Do those two kinds
> of butter even mix? What about the relative size of the muffins? That would make for
> some complicated grocery shopping -- and I'm lactose intolerant, which would only
> make a bad situation worse.
>
> Next, impact is an inherently nebulous and slippery subject (probably made more
> slippery by all that butter). Funders seem a little naive in their definition of it;
> and tying down your own role in it is not straightforward; easy to over-state and
> understate. It's worth noting that HEFCE are fine with guestimates of impact,
> including vague gesticulations towards radio audience figures, Wikipedia page
> edits/views, and numbers of Twitter followers. They may become more discerning about
> this sort of thing in time though, as the e-generation moves into positions of power...
>
> Ways to improve impact include:
> - inviting media, policy and practitioner types, as well as service users if
> appropriate, on to the project steering group;
> - making use of govt research offices/depts, e.g. Government Social Research Service
> (UK), and Members Research Service (Wales), and telling them about the project really
> early on;
> - exploring different levels of user involvement, see
> http://www.lancs.ac.uk/researchethics/5-2-outlook.html
>
> Read Sandra Nutley on impact on public policy:
> http://www.business-school.ed.ac.uk/about/people?a=15015&staff_id=475
>
> Health and wellbeing is important for impact. See:
> http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_113194
>
>
> An interesting blog hosted at the LSE:
> http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/
>
> A big research project down under about impact in research (with an international
> focus):
> http://www.issr.uq.edu.au/EBP-home
>
> 'Getting Social Science Research into the Evidence base in Government', a very useful
> and concise document hosted by the ESRC:
> http://www.esrc.ac.uk/_images/Getting%20social%20science%20research%20into%20the%20evidence%20base%20in%20government_tcm8-20047.pdf
>
>
> This isn't strictly about impact but here's a very useful detail I found about the
> reduced number of publications permissible for different stages of 'early career
> researchers'. See para 72 of:
> http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/pubs/2011/02_11/02_11add.pdf#page=4
>
> ...which clarifies page 19 of the original report:
> http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/pubs/2011/02_11/02_11.pdf#page=20
>
> Both of those are worth reading in their entirety, as they say lots of useful stuff
> about impact. See also:
> 'Panel criteria and working methods'
> (http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/pubs/2012/01_12/) paragraphs 72 - 104 of Part
> 2C. This provides specific guidance from Main Panel C on impact and includes examples
> and evidence of impact.
>
> And lastly, nobody seems to like Marmite -- so there are no inexplicable weirdos on
> this email list then. Marvellous.
>
> Happy impacting everyone.
>
> Dave
>
>
> --
> Dr. Dave Sayers
> Honorary Research Fellow
> College of Arts & Humanities
> and Language Research Centre
> Swansea University
> [log in to unmask]
> http://swansea.academia.edu/DaveSayers
>
>
>
> On 12/03/2012 14:39, Dave Sayers wrote:
>> Hello Social Policyers,
>>
>> A few weeks ago I came scrounging for insights on how to deliver a
>> forthcoming presentation to government types (as an academic type
>> myself). Your answers went well beyond what I'd hoped for, and gave me a
>> fantastic preparation for the task ahead. In fact your excellent counsel
>> on that matter has earned you my repeat business!
>>
>> Today's question is about 'impact' -- the Marmite of the academic world,
>> and a growing source of pleasure or disgust, depending on your tastes.
>> Now, I'm in the early stages of co-editing a book about the interface
>> between sociolinguistics and 'impact'
>> (http://linguistlist.org/issues/23/23-1034.html). I'm also being
>> interviewed for a job soon where research impact across the social
>> sciences is a big factor. So, in asking this question there are mixed
>> motives afoot. This could be seen as a pretty selfish request, but I've
>> plucked up the nerve to ask all of you because I think the responses
>> will be informative to everyone. As with my previous query about
>> presenting to government, if you send your responses directly to me,
>> then I'll collate everyone's advice and send it back to the list next
>> week, duly anonymised. Your inboxes will all receive less of a battering
>> that way.
>>
>> I'm aiming this mostly at academics in the social sciences (broadly
>> defined), but by all means those working in other fields -- and outside
>> academia too -- are very much welcome to contribute.
>>
>> I'll split this into a few different parts, to draw out some different
>> aspects. Of course, please feel free to skip questions.
>>
>> 1. What pressures have you felt to emphasise impact in your research
>> funding applications? Have you had applications turned down on the basis
>> of impact? How do you feel you could have improved? Alternatively, has
>> your exemplary attention to impact tipped the balance in favour of your
>> proposal?
>>
>> 2. Do you feel antagonistic to the growing importance of impact? If so,
>> then what might win you round to the idea? Or do you already feel
>> enthusiastic about impact? If so, then what sorts of facilities and
>> supports would enable you to pursue that agenda more easily in your
>> research?
>>
>> 3. What successes have you had boosting the impactfulness (like my
>> word?) of your research, for example bending the ears of government, or
>> improving the lives or working practices of your research participants
>> (and of wider interest groups)?
>>
>> 4. How do you personally understand the meaning of impact as it's
>> bandied about in funding bodies, including the likes of HEFCE/HEFCW
>> etc., ESRC, and others? Do you get the feeling there are (gasp!)
>> unwritten rules behind it all?
>>
>> 5. Do you like Marmite?
>>
>> I thank you all sincerely in advance for your responses. As I mentioned,
>> I will dutifully collate, summarise and anonymise all your advice, and
>> distribute it to the list next week.
>>
>> Impactfully yours,
>> Dave
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Dave Sayers
>> Honorary Research Fellow
>> College of Arts & Humanities
>> and Language Research Centre
>> Swansea University
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://swansea.academia.edu/DaveSayers
>>