Exploring preferences for impact versus publications among UK business and management academics

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)
10 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Academics are under increasing pressure to demonstrate the impact of their research with external actors. Some national research assessment systems have mandated academics to document their impact on non-academic actors, and linked research funding to assessments of these impacts. Although there has been considerable debate around the design of these systems, little is known about how academics perceive the value of impact against more conventional academic outputs, such as publications. Using multisource data, including a large-scale survey of UK business and management academics, this paper explores the individual and institutional factors that explain an individual’s preference for impact versus publication. The results show that academics display a preference for impact over publications, even when that impact is not associated with requirements of the assessment system in terms of rigour of the underpinning research. The preference for impact over publications is heightened by organization tenure, non-academic work experience, intrinsic career motivations and research-intensive contexts, while it is weakened by academic influence, extrinsic career motives and academic rank. We explore the implications of these findings for the design of research assessment systems and academics’ reactions to them.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1769-1782
Number of pages14
JournalResearch Policy
Volume46
Issue number10
Early online date29 Sep 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2017

Fingerprint

Industry
Research assessment

Keywords

  • Academic engagement
  • Impact
  • Publications
  • Research assessment systems
  • Research excellence framework

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Strategy and Management
  • Management Science and Operations Research
  • Management of Technology and Innovation

Cite this

Exploring preferences for impact versus publications among UK business and management academics. / Salter, Ammon; Salandra, Rossella; Walker, James.

In: Research Policy, Vol. 46, No. 10, 01.12.2017, p. 1769-1782.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d0ae0021730c4be580fe1cb755e8298e,
title = "Exploring preferences for impact versus publications among UK business and management academics",
abstract = "Academics are under increasing pressure to demonstrate the impact of their research with external actors. Some national research assessment systems have mandated academics to document their impact on non-academic actors, and linked research funding to assessments of these impacts. Although there has been considerable debate around the design of these systems, little is known about how academics perceive the value of impact against more conventional academic outputs, such as publications. Using multisource data, including a large-scale survey of UK business and management academics, this paper explores the individual and institutional factors that explain an individual’s preference for impact versus publication. The results show that academics display a preference for impact over publications, even when that impact is not associated with requirements of the assessment system in terms of rigour of the underpinning research. The preference for impact over publications is heightened by organization tenure, non-academic work experience, intrinsic career motivations and research-intensive contexts, while it is weakened by academic influence, extrinsic career motives and academic rank. We explore the implications of these findings for the design of research assessment systems and academics’ reactions to them.",
keywords = "Academic engagement, Impact, Publications, Research assessment systems, Research excellence framework",
author = "Ammon Salter and Rossella Salandra and James Walker",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.005",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "1769--1782",
journal = "Research Policy",
issn = "0048-7333",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring preferences for impact versus publications among UK business and management academics

AU - Salter, Ammon

AU - Salandra, Rossella

AU - Walker, James

PY - 2017/12/1

Y1 - 2017/12/1

N2 - Academics are under increasing pressure to demonstrate the impact of their research with external actors. Some national research assessment systems have mandated academics to document their impact on non-academic actors, and linked research funding to assessments of these impacts. Although there has been considerable debate around the design of these systems, little is known about how academics perceive the value of impact against more conventional academic outputs, such as publications. Using multisource data, including a large-scale survey of UK business and management academics, this paper explores the individual and institutional factors that explain an individual’s preference for impact versus publication. The results show that academics display a preference for impact over publications, even when that impact is not associated with requirements of the assessment system in terms of rigour of the underpinning research. The preference for impact over publications is heightened by organization tenure, non-academic work experience, intrinsic career motivations and research-intensive contexts, while it is weakened by academic influence, extrinsic career motives and academic rank. We explore the implications of these findings for the design of research assessment systems and academics’ reactions to them.

AB - Academics are under increasing pressure to demonstrate the impact of their research with external actors. Some national research assessment systems have mandated academics to document their impact on non-academic actors, and linked research funding to assessments of these impacts. Although there has been considerable debate around the design of these systems, little is known about how academics perceive the value of impact against more conventional academic outputs, such as publications. Using multisource data, including a large-scale survey of UK business and management academics, this paper explores the individual and institutional factors that explain an individual’s preference for impact versus publication. The results show that academics display a preference for impact over publications, even when that impact is not associated with requirements of the assessment system in terms of rigour of the underpinning research. The preference for impact over publications is heightened by organization tenure, non-academic work experience, intrinsic career motivations and research-intensive contexts, while it is weakened by academic influence, extrinsic career motives and academic rank. We explore the implications of these findings for the design of research assessment systems and academics’ reactions to them.

KW - Academic engagement

KW - Impact

KW - Publications

KW - Research assessment systems

KW - Research excellence framework

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030711208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.005

DO - 10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.005

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 1769

EP - 1782

JO - Research Policy

JF - Research Policy

SN - 0048-7333

IS - 10

ER -