Moving Forward
Even though only the first of these four factors have been discussed, it is already clear that issues surrounding ARI, whether Internal or External (commonly called research impact) need more attention. I have started to address the initial question about what research impact stemming from the Academy comprehensively is.
It has become apparent from my conversations with faculty that academic institutions, faculty, governance boards, agencies, and Impact Professionals are not all speaking the same language. Creating a common understanding by establishing a common language among faculty and academic institutions is the first step.
So, I have used ARI instead of research impacts and academic impacts or other similar terms for the impacts of research associated with academia. This is combined with the understanding that all impacts stemming from research in the Academy is considered in practice and theory a research impact.
However, all varying types of impact may not be the specific type of research impact a local, state, national, or international body is looking to fund. Each funding entity or government body has its own funding agenda.
Impact is both an inanimate and animate construct. Among other characteristics, even though we tend to emphasize the positive aspect of impact it can also be negative. Therefore, a comprehensive definition of research impact in the Academy should reflect these features.
I have also taken this one step further and have begun to provide an ARI model/theory based on the literature. Faculty cannot be comprehensively and intelligently supported in ARI without institutional comprehension of the concept.
Based on current trends and environment, ARI strategy and implementation will become a critical component for increasing financial support and liquidity for faculty and institutions, respectively. This is because ARI will enable faculty and institutions to monetize their impact in new and varied ways beyond that of funding agencies and governmental units.
As someone who is concerned about all the above-mentioned issues, I am trying to do my part but I know that is not enough.
It is going to take a “Unified Us” to really move the proverbial “needle” in this area. Especially if: we are serious about empowering and equipping faculty to effectively participate in this changing global landscape towards all aspects of impact; catalyze a robust research impact culture; want to help faculty get support for their research; want to help keep our institutions financially stable; and help to play our part in benefiting society.
References and Other Comments:
* Academic research work can include scholarship and creative activity. Research takes many forms within the Academy depending on the field and its traditions.
**A full reference list will be provided at another time. These references below are a subset of these documents.
3. Brewer J. (2013). The public value of the social sciences: an interpretive essay. London: Bloomsbury.
5. Chavda, J., and Patel, A. (2015). Measuring research impact: bibliometrics, social media, altmetrics, and the BJGP. The British journal of general practice: the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 66(642), e59-61.
7. London, J. (2018). A content analysis of how STEM education researchers discuss the impact of their publicly-supported research. International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(3), 1120-1137.
8. Meagher L., Lyall C., Nutley S. (2008). Flows of knowledge, expertise and influence: a method for assessing policy and practice impacts from social science research. Research Evaluation. doi:10.3152/095820208X331720.
9. Mhurchú, A. N., McLeod, L., Collins, S., & Siles-Brügge, G. (2017). The Present and the Future of the Research Excellence Framework Impact Agenda in the UK Academy: A Reflection from Politics and International Studies.
Political Studies Review, 15(1), 60–72,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929916658918.
10. Nutley S.M., Walter I., Davies H.T. (2007). Using evidence: how research can inform public services. Bristol University Press.
11. Penfield, T., Baker, M.J., Scoble, R. and Wykes, M.C. (2014) Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: A review.
Research Evaluation, 23(1), 21-32.
https://academic.oup.com/rev/article/23/1/21/2889056.
13. Rosas S.R., Kagan J.M., Schouten J.T., Slack P.A., Trochim W. MK., (2011) Evaluating Research and Impact: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research by the NIH/NIAID HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks.
PLOS ONE 6(3): e17428.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017428.
14. Smith, S., Ward, V., House, A. (2011). ‘Impact’ in the Proposals for the UK's Research Excellence Framework: shifting the Boundaries of Academic Autonomy. Research Policy. 40. 1369-1379. 10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.026.
15. Walter I., Davies H., Nutley S. (2003). Increasing research impact through partnerships: evidence from outside health care. Journal of Health Services and Research Policy. doi: 10.1258/135581903322405180.
16. Wilkinson H., Gallagher M., Smith M. (2012). A collaborative approach to defining the usefulness of impact: lessons from a knowledge exchange project involving academics and social work practitioners. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, Volume 8, Number 3, August 2012, pp. 311-327(17). doi:10.1332/174426412X654040.
Written by:
Dr. Michael Thompson aka “The Broader Impacts Guy”
Michael Thompson, an Academic – Industry Impact Professional, is currently the Head of Research Impact Enterprises or RIE: A Metaprising Research Impact Accelerator for Academic on Institutions. RIE is the first hybrid non-profit like and academically-based business ecosystem entity that functions as a conduit and facilitator between the Academy and the Rest of Society. RIE achieves this by working in collaboration with others to provide initiatives, services, and products that help individuals, faculty, businesses, institutions, and other organized units manage, maximize, and accelerate their impact.
Click here to be provided with an overview of how RIE works.
Before serving as Head of RIE, Michael was the Founding Director of the Broader Impacts in Research (BIR) organization, on the Senior Staff of the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR), member of the Center for Research Program Development and Enrichment (CRPDE), and Affiliate Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Oklahoma (OU). He also served on the National Alliance for Broader Impacts (NABI) Working Group, which developed the Broader Impacts Guiding Principles and Questions for National Science Foundation (NSF) Proposals. For more information on NSF Broader Impacts and broader impacts in general please visit,
thebroaderimpactsguy.com.