Growing_the_Best_and_Brightest._The_Drivers_of_Research_Excellence

Growing the best and brightest March 2014
mix of funding and responding to competitive
pressures were also seen as important by
interviewees.
In relation to many of these activities, our
research emphasises that the “on-the-ground”
or “day-to-day” initiatives by researchers can
be at least as important as the “high-level
strategic” initiatives instigated by institutions.
For example:
we heard that the personal relationship
researchers forge in the early stages of
their career can have a critical effect on
their opportunities for collaboration later.
These personal relationships are usually
forged in the corridors of institutions and
at conferences;
we also heard that one of the benefits of
developing an institution level “research
strategy” was not the roadmap provided
by the strategy itself, but the opportunity
to bring together different individuals to
share points of view and best practice;
and
that the terms on which different sources
of funding are made available had a
bearing on research productivity – not
just the level of funding. For example, the
freedom of research direction, or lack of
it, after a grant has been won.
A common practical challenge for any
individual researcher seemed to be making
time to lay the foundations for conducting
excellent research in the future, given the
pressure to do excellent research now. This is
exacerbated by uncertainty over what activities
are worthwhile.
In line with the key findings of this report, our
conclusions are as follows.
» First, supporting excellence in recruiting,
developing and motivating people will
contribute to research excellence and
productivity. Potential impediments to
excellence in these areas are the actual or
expected time and effort associated with
recruiting individuals that need a visa to
work in the UK and a lack of recognition for
carrying out mentoring and appraisal
activities.
researchers in academia and industry
together through a common forum.
» Third, although the scope of our study has
not focused on funding, it indicates that the
terms on which funding is made available
has a bearing on what/how research is
undertaken. Although differences between
funding sources in relation to the terms on
which funding is made available is not
unusual and may be entirely appropriate,
this study suggests that better
understanding the differences between
funding sources, and what works and what
doesn’t could further ensure that the limited
funds are invested in the right way.
» Finally, in line with previous research, this
study suggests that the UK is well-positioned
to remain a research leader in the future and
its competitive position vis-à-vis other
countries is unlikely to be undermined in the
short-term. Of course, continued investment
in research is necessary to maintain the UK’s
position in the long-term.
Section 4 of this report sets out ideas for
further research relating to better
understanding:
the extent to which the recruitment of
researchers from outside of the European
Union is affected by the actual or expected
time and effort associated with acquiring
visas;
the role that middle-career researchers
might have in UK research productivity;
how much excellence in mentoring and
appraisal affects key measures of research
excellence (e.g. from peer review and
bibliometric);
whether more could be done to help
early-career researchers forge personal
relationships as the foundation for
collaboration later;
the measures of success used by HEIs
when evaluating their research strategies;
the differences in terms between funding
sources and the effect this has on
research; and
benchmarking researchers’ salaries and
the extent to which trade-offs are made
between salaries and other factors (such
as institution reputation).
» Second, efforts to facilitate day-to-day
collaboration, particularly early in a
researcher’s career are likely to contribute to
research excellence, and help support larger
scale collaborative initiatives. For example,
BIS might be in a good position to bring new