I like the response and thoughts, Donald.

It is extremely important for us not to be drawn into the impact agenda, as defined (somewhat) by REF, without approaching it critically and analytically. The instrumental rationale and linear process it follows are, I believe, things we warn our students to avoid unless they have critiqued them.

Having said this, we are experts in our fields and do (often) have something to say that is of relevance and based on our research perspectives and using our understanding of the political world is helpful in negotiating our way into it and being heard.

I wonder, however, if there is a gendered perspective that we are missing in this discussion. Indeed, those of us writing at present (although only three) are all male, but anecdotally I think that males are often more able to negotiate a way into policy discussions, and within higher education, and we need to be mindful of this.

Jonathan

Professor Jonathan Parker PhD, AcSS, FHEA, FRSA
Director Centre of Social Work, Sociology & Social Policy
School of Health & Social Care
Bournemouth University
Royal London House
Christchurch Road
Bournemouth
BH1 3LT
+44(0)1202 962 810

@parkerj1960

JUC Fellow

Visiting Professor Tasik Chini Research Centre, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Visiting Professor Universiti Sarawak Malaysia (UNIMAS)

Editor: Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning, http://www.whitingbirch.net/cgi-bin/scribe?showinfo=ip008;from=ig01

Joint Series Editor: Transforming Social Work Practice http://www.learningmatters.co.uk/social/index.asp

Amazon author page: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jonathan-Parker/e/B001HQ4G4C/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0

Research & publications http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/view/author/ddc4e9a1fa616426282f800aea697b9f.html

Centre for Social Work, Sociology and Social Policy http://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/csw/index.html
________________________________________
From: Social-Policy is run by SPA for all social policy specialists [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Donald Houston [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 21 April 2014 09:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 'Impact' in the social sciences

A few thoughts, for what they're worth:

1. It's not what you know, but who you know.  However, networks are not closed to newcomers, as Dave discovered with a few polite (but also, I suspect, well-crafted) emails.  Getting inside a policy network/governance structure helps hugely - if you deal only with one or two individuals, your impact is limited to how much influence they have.

2. Having a role/title implies credibility and helps open doors.  It's probably not too difficult for someone to create something they could call themselves 'Director' of - but in my experience being tied to a university gains substantial credibility before you've even said or done anything (it's a bit like holding a qualification - it demonstrates you've passed a university's recruitment process so you're probably not an idiot (although there may be exceptions to this rule!)).

3.  Policy makers don't want to be told about a specific new piece of research by one individual (that individual is only going to say the whole world should follow their conclusions - surprise, surprise) - they want to get a sense of a body of knowledge/understanding or simply have someone to bounce their own ideas off.  In this sense, 'Knowledge Exchange' is closer to teaching than research and is a two-way process of 'co-production' of knowledge.

4. The REF impact agenda assumes a rather rational linear policy making process, which bears little if any resemblance to reality.  This might work up to a point if you discover a new drug or develop a new piece of software, but in the social sciences?....  Then again, the REF is about research excellence, not who your mates are (see point 1 above).

Donald

Dr Donald Houston
Director, Scottish Cities Knowledge Centre
School of Geography&  Geosciences
Irvine Building
University of St Andrews
North Street
St Andrews, KY16 9AL
Fife
Scotland, UK
Tel: 01334 463924
Fax: 01334 463949

Links

Scottish Cities Knowledge Centre www.sckc.org.uk

Centre for Housing Research www.st-andrews.ac.uk/chr

School of Geography and Geosciences www.st-andrews.ac.uk/gg

The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: No SC013532


-----Original Message-----
From: Social-Policy is run by SPA for all social policy specialists [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dave Sayers
Sent: 18 April 2014 19:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 'Impact' in the social sciences

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/Publica
> tionsPolicyAndGuidance/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%20
> into%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
>>


BU is a Disability Two Ticks Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU DisabledGo webpages [ http://www.disabledgo.com/en/org/bournemouth-university ]
This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.