handbook-executive-leadership-of-research-development-pdf-v10
handbook-executive-leadership-of-research-development-pdf-v10
handbook-executive-leadership-of-research-development-pdf-v10
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
When faced with the challenging task <strong>of</strong> reducing <strong>research</strong> centres and programs<strong>executive</strong> leaders <strong>of</strong> <strong>research</strong> focus first and foremost on clear and unequivocalevidence <strong>of</strong> recent trends in performance relative to benchmarks. Low performanceneeds to be addressed with frankness and options for <strong>development</strong> includingalternative pathways and support mechanisms for individuals. Where projectsare lagging but the <strong>research</strong>ers are highly capable the <strong>research</strong> leaders shouldendeavour to steer the <strong>research</strong> in a new direction. There is a strong case for peoplecontinuing to pursue their academic interests where they built connections betweenareas <strong>of</strong> strength in <strong>research</strong> and teaching, including <strong>research</strong> to inform teaching.The strategies <strong>of</strong> accelerating areas <strong>of</strong> strength and reframing low performing areaswith potential both carry risks <strong>of</strong> the <strong>research</strong> programs not measuring up to thechallenge. Any number <strong>of</strong> factors can conspire to undermine the good intentions.Highly successful <strong>executive</strong> leaders in <strong>research</strong> productive universities allow for risk,indeed they create room for flexibility in structures and regulations to encouragefaculties, <strong>research</strong> centres and <strong>research</strong>ers to be entrepreneurial. The risk points aretolerated and rewarded, as long as they meet the outcomes that are set.Enable <strong>research</strong> leaders to maintain their <strong>research</strong> activity at thehighest levelThe academics identified as <strong>research</strong> leaders will be amongst the most productive<strong>research</strong>ers in the university. The <strong>executive</strong> leader <strong>of</strong> <strong>research</strong> should not overlookthe direct contribution these people make to the <strong>research</strong> capacity <strong>of</strong> the university as<strong>research</strong>ers. The <strong>leadership</strong> roles and the multitude <strong>of</strong> <strong>development</strong> activities they areinvolved in should not interfere with their own <strong>research</strong> programs. Time and space tomaintain a consistent workflow is usually the main issue.A notable predictor <strong>of</strong> the publication success <strong>of</strong> university departments is the head <strong>of</strong>department’s record. 24 Not only should this be a factor in policy for recruitment andinternal appointments, it can also be supported in real terms including additionalallowances for personal <strong>research</strong> assistance, time to present <strong>research</strong> findings atconferences, and support to engage in review processes. Direct support in the form<strong>of</strong> small grants from the <strong>executive</strong> leader’s discretionary fund will assist the head <strong>of</strong>department to maintain their <strong>research</strong> and publication productivity, and have theadded impact <strong>of</strong> sending a message to new and prospective academics that good<strong>leadership</strong> should not compromise good <strong>research</strong>.56 A <strong>handbook</strong> for <strong>executive</strong> <strong>leadership</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>research</strong> <strong>development</strong>