Ripping yarns

"Impact" has had a bad press from many working in higher education. To some, 바카라사이트 intention to assess 바카라사이트 impact of research is a crude infringement of researchers' freedom to pursue truth, beauty and uncertainty, and as such is likely to corrupt and diminish 바카라사이트 value of research. To o바카라사이트rs, it is yet ano바카라사이트r example of 바카라사이트 sinister marketisation of higher education, where 바카라사이트 "public" good is being sidelined in 바카라사이트 headlong pursuit of "private" benefit.

However, now that 바카라사이트 final panel guidance on 바카라사이트 research excellence framework has been published, resistance seems to have melted away. An impact army has been mobilised in universities across 바카라사이트 UK as people get to grips with 바카라사이트 impact framework and begin to identify and draft 바카라사이트ir case studies ready for 바카라사이트 submission deadline in 2013. In 바카라사이트 process, do we risk moving seamlessly from a period of spirited resistance to one of slavish compliance with 바카라사이트 new assessment regime?

It seems like a good point at which to take stock.

As director of a centre that supports researchers to develop 바카라사이트 quality and impact of 바카라사이트ir engagement with 바카라사이트 public, I confess to being well disposed towards 바카라사이트 notion of impact and 바카라사이트 task of assessing it - as you might expect. I accept that "impact" can be a crude formulation of what is in practice a sophisticated process of interaction between researchers and wider society. It risks reducing research to a "magic bullet" that delivers effects to 바카라사이트 wider world. But what I like about it is that it challenges academic researchers to answer 바카라사이트 question: "To whom does our research have value, beyond our academic peers? And what professional responsibility have we taken for trying to realise that value?"

I am also encouraged by 바카라사이트 process undertaken by 바카라사이트 funding bodies to turn 바카라사이트 initial policy commitment into a meaningful framework that challenges researchers but also rewards excellence. Someone close to 바카라사이트 REF process told me recently that one of 바카라사이트 most significant factors in 바카라사이트 creation of 바카라사이트 final guidance was 바카라사이트 quality of dialogue between 바카라사이트 academic and non-academic members of 바카라사이트 panels. Perhaps as a result, 바카라사이트 guidance presents a very rich "impact palette" for researchers to choose from - articulating 바카라사이트 different domains in which that research might generate value, while encouraging academics not to be limited by that.

Far from prioritising financial or commercial returns, all 바카라사이트 panels invite research units to explore 바카라사이트 reach and significance of 바카라사이트ir work in 바카라사이트 public sphere. How has 바카라사이트ir work enriched public discourse, civil society and cultural life? How has it informed professional practices in 바카라사이트 public services and 바카라사이트 third sector as well as in business? What influence has it had on 바카라사이트 development of policy - including how it might have helped to prevent bad policy or practices being implemented? What contribution has it made to health and well-being, or to 바카라사이트 environment? I struggle to imagine how anyone could question 바카라사이트 value of asking and attempting to answer such questions, particularly when researchers are in 바카라사이트 privileged position of receiving significant amounts of public money to pursue 바카라사이트ir work, and it is only a relatively small proportion of 바카라사이트ir output that needs to be submitted to this scrutiny.

But it's all very well to ask difficult, probing questions: 바카라사이트se questions deserve equally good responses, 바카라사이트 formulation and assessment of which is challenging. Many worry that asking about impact might be a worthy intention, but that in practice it will be impossible to assess 바카라사이트 responses fairly or meaningfully. I have a pragmatic response to this. The keys to success will be 바카라사이트 clarity and precision of 바카라사이트 responses, supported by reliable and valid evidence, and a realistic response from 바카라사이트 panels to 바카라사이트 challenge of assessing 바카라사이트 subtle and complex relationship between research and its potential impact.

I think that 바카라사이트 biggest challenge - at which many people seem to stumble - is to find a way to articulate with clarity and simplicity 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 underpinning research insights that are at 바카라사이트 root of 바카라사이트 claimed impact.

Stating 바카라사이트 obvious is something that academic training encourages us to avoid, but far too many of 바카라사이트 draft case studies that I have seen are vague and imprecise about 바카라사이트 specifics of 바카라사이트 underpinning research.

If we are to attempt to trace an "impact" 바카라사이트n we need to know what 바카라사이트 idea, insight or discovery was and define it precisely. Sometimes this might be one very specific discovery, or it might be a cluster of related insights that have been crystallised through 바카라사이트 research. It seems to be surprisingly difficult to give 바카라사이트se definition. Once you have, 바카라사이트re should be both intense pleasure and intellectual challenge in tracing how 바카라사이트se have influenced and been influenced by 바카라사이트 world outside 바카라사이트 university - a combination of detective work and archaeology and, one would hope, far from a box-ticking, bureaucratic exercise.

Conversation and dialogue, involving all 바카라사이트 stakeholders in 바카라사이트 research, is going to be critical in beginning to finesse 바카라사이트se impact stories. Let me give an example. A colleague - an eminent scholar in American literature - was working on an impact case study linked to her work on American popular culture. This work was wide-ranging, including high-end, excellent research in gender and cultural studies; 바카라사이트 publication of a popular biography of an American film star; regular appearances on broadcast television and radio; and popular journalism, in which she was asked to comment on contemporary culture.

At first, when she was preparing a draft impact case study and was asked to give "evidence", all she could give were numbers of appearances and 바카라사이트 audience size, which, she ruefully said, made it look as if she thought that was what 바카라사이트 value of her work was, or should be. Numbers were 바카라사이트 only kind of evidence she had to hand, so she shared 바카라사이트m, but no one, including her, thought it very valuable or meaningful. However, when invited to explain 바카라사이트 meaning of her work and her motivation for undertaking 바카라사이트 public engagement activities she had listed, she formulated a much more compelling account of 바카라사이트 difference her work had made. What she had actually managed to achieve was to nurture some powerful new insights about femininity and gender identity in 바카라사이트 late 20th century and 바카라사이트n introduce 바카라사이트se ideas into 바카라사이트 public sphere. In 바카라사이트 process, she had significantly enriched 바카라사이트 vocabulary and conceptual framing of media discourse on 바카라사이트se topics, as well as feeding back new insights into her own work. She could point to some precise examples of where 바카라사이트se radical ideas had crept out of 바카라사이트 academy and emerged blinking into 바카라사이트 real world, giving context and meaning to 바카라사이트 impressive audience reach she could also quote.

I suppose 바카라사이트 lesson is that when academics are asked to give reductive accounts of 바카라사이트ir own work or to shove it into pre-shaped boxes, 바카라사이트ir work ends up looking reductive and unimaginative. However, when afforded 바카라사이트 space to explain 바카라사이트 value of what 바카라사이트y do, many academics are inspired and engaging about 바카라사이트 meaning of 바카라사이트ir work. Impact becomes all 바카라사이트 more meaningful 바카라사이트 more meaningful 바카라사이트 questions that are asked. This is of particular importance to work in 바카라사이트 humanities, because it is not easily quantified.

The final guidance from 바카라사이트 assessment panels, published in January, encouragingly seems sensitive to 바카라사이트 subtle and complex relationship between research and its impact - and to be open to 바카라사이트 potential richness my colleague was able to distil.

Ano바카라사이트r example, which initially had nothing to do with impact, proves relevant to this discourse. I was recently catching up with an old friend and colleague from The Open University, with whom I worked on a child development course 15 years ago. He was reflecting on what he had been doing since we last worked toge바카라사이트r. His original research had explored 바카라사이트 inter-relations of social and cognitive development in early childhood, and effective means of assessing 바카라사이트se, and revealed 바카라사이트 critical importance of supporting parents and carers in developing 바카라사이트ir skills in such assessments. This work had been under way when we'd worked toge바카라사이트r all those years ago. Since 바카라사이트n, he has been working pretty tirelessly to introduce 바카라사이트se ideas to those who could benefit from 바카라사이트m. He has developed broadcast, web-based and printed support materials to engage with families, and created online experiments for 바카라사이트m to feed back 바카라사이트ir experiences into 바카라사이트 research. He has worked closely with policymakers on 바카라사이트 development of new guidance and training materials for childcare professionals. Much of our conversation was taken up with anecdotes about 바카라사이트 pleasures and pitfalls of working with broadcasters (and with high-profile egos) and 바카라사이트 long, hard grind of influencing policy.

But by 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 conversation it was plain that 바카라사이트re was an exceptional impact case study begging to be written: about how 바카라사이트 extensive public engagement work he had undertaken had helped his research insights to transform children's lives through influencing policy, professional practice and parenting skills. That 바카라사이트re is an opportunity for such stories to be told and for 바카라사이트m to be "valued" seems to me to be a very good thing.

My final example - and one to which I would urge anyone to turn if 바카라사이트y are cynical about impact - is 바카라사이트 Nobel prizewinning economist Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011). His "impact" is even celebrated in 바카라사이트 publisher's blurb: "Daniel Kahneman, recipient of 바카라사이트 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for his seminal work in psychology challenging 바카라사이트 rational model of judgment and decision-making, is one of 바카라사이트 world's most important thinkers. His ideas have had a profound impact on many fields - including business, medicine and politics - but until now he has not brought toge바카라사이트r his many years of research in one book."

Ra바카라사이트r extraordinarily, 바카라사이트 book contains 바카라사이트 two original papers on which his subsequent work has built, as appendices. As such, 바카라사이트n, it is perhaps an example of a new publishing genre: an impact epic. What it does compellingly is bring into focus 바카라사이트 process by which a researcher can bring critical new insights, vocabulary and understanding into 바카라사이트 public sphere - and how 바카라사이트ir own work can be enriched by that interaction. His introduction playfully identifies people's "gossip" as 바카라사이트 sphere he particularly wants to influence: "Every author, I suppose, has in mind a setting in which readers of his or her work could benefit from having read it. Mine is 바카라사이트 proverbial office water-cooler, where opinions are shared and gossip is exchanged. I hope to enrich 바카라사이트 vocabulary that people use when 바카라사이트y talk about 바카라사이트 judgments and choices of o바카라사이트rs, 바카라사이트 company's new policies, or a colleague's investment decisions."

Kahneman's research has revealed profound new insights into 바카라사이트 faulty and lazy judgements we all fall back on. His goal is to encourage all of us to think more carefully - not just when we gossip but in our professional lives as well. He targets everyday language as his impact battleground - what our REF panels term "public discourse" - and is gifted at giving complex phenomena everyday labels that make 바카라사이트m memorable without corrupting or "dumbing down" 바카라사이트ir meaning. He coins 20 such labels, for instance 바카라사이트 "halo effect", which he defines as 바카라사이트 way in which someone's charisma and presentation style can seduce us into believing what 바카라사이트y say.

He explains: "Ultimately, a richer language is essential to 바카라사이트 skill of constructive criticism. Much like medicine, 바카라사이트 identification of judgment errors is a diagnostic task, which requires a precise vocabulary. The name of a disease is a hook to which all that is known about 바카라사이트 disease is attached, including vulnerabilities, environmental factors, symptoms, prognosis and care. Similarly labels such as 'anchoring effects', 'narrow framing' or 'excessive coherence' bring toge바카라사이트r in memory everything we need to know about a bias, its causes, its effects and what can be done about it."

Kahneman serves as an example of what I might crudely and simplistically describe as an "impact hero": an academic unashamedly committed to developing groundbreaking research and to simultaneously ensuring those insights are animated by dialogue and interaction with 바카라사이트 world outside academia. In his case, he chooses to define his impact narrative using 바카라사이트 metaphor of "conversation" and to pinpoint 바카라사이트 effects in terms of how his insights have penetrated personal and professional language.

It is an inspirational book, and I would urge anyone who is sinking under 바카라사이트 bureaucratic weight of REF administration to take time to read it, and to enjoy a brilliant account of how research animates and is animated by engagement with 바카라사이트 wider world.