Handbook for Executive

Leadership of Research

Development

Craig McInnis, Paul Ramsden, Don Maconachie

Purpose of the research

leadership handbook

Commissioned by the Centre for Leadership in

Research Development (CLRD) in partnership with

Queensland University of Technology.

To support building the research capacity and

capability of Collaborative Research Network

Universities (CRN).

Intended to guide new entrants to executive

leadership of research development, and senior staff

aspiring to such roles.

Purpose of the research

leadership handbook

A source of advice for university executives about the leadership of research

Specific focus on research development in less research-intensive universities (and those that have lost momentum) seeking to:

expand their research profile

enhance their performance

compete more effectively for research funding.

Guiding perspectives

Focus on strategic leadership and productivity

What successful leaders do

No set formula for success

Different starting points and challenges

Relevant across different policy contexts.

Key evidence-based assumptions

1. Strategic leadership is the single most important

environmental factor influencing research productivity.

2. Institutional leadership is not simply research group or

department leadership on a higher level.

3. Leadership of research requires specialist skills and

knowledge about the conditions that contribute to

academic productivity.

and…

Key evidence-based assumptions

4. Strategic leadership must be both robust and

collaborative in order to enhance research

productivity.

5. ‘Assertive participative governance’, which combines

unambiguous objectives with devolved leadership of

research, is the key to success.

Our approach

1. Case studies of good practice in six universities

(Australia and UK)

2. Review of international literature

3. Developing core principles and elements that guide

the strategic leadership of research across an

entire institution.

Case Studies: interim findings

Case Study Focus

factors that contribute to the research

performance of the university, and the lessons

they provide for new and aspiring leaders of

research development in less research-intensive

universities

identifying the contextual factors underlying

variations in institutional strategic responses to

the challenges of generating research activity

what effective leaders actually do to advance the

strategic research agenda of their institutions,

rather than generic attributes of leadership.

Case Study: Portsmouth

Research strategy 2012-2017

Theme 1: Research excellence and profile

Theme 2: Collaboration

Theme 3: Sustainable research environment

Theme 4: Supporting researchers and research

leaders

Theme 5: Research informs educational strategy

Theme 6: Social, economic and cultural impact

Portsmouth…

Vision: ‘A culture where everyone takes research

seriously’

Success depends on corporate buy-in: better, more,

upwards!

Remove obstacles to success: use peer review,

mentoring, rewards

Devolve leadership: cooperate on strategy and action

plans

Develop shared expectations of ‘research-active’

Ambitious targets to drive change (e.g. ↑20% in external

funds)

and….

Portsmouth

Central, competitive internal funding (£200k)

Focus on recruiting active researchers & experts

from outside

Tackle urban myths; allow room to fail

Integrate education and research

Don’t overestimate importance of data: focus on

clear principles

Acknowledge returns won’t be immediate

Case study A: From a plateau…

Transparency critical

Back to the basics of good research

Injection of new funds

Push responsibility back to the faculties and

researchers

Close tracking of progress (including income

prediction)

Aggressive stretch research targets

Reduced organisational complexity

Significant seed funding

Establish simplified research focus and structures

Major investment in new researchers

Keep moving - ready for a new research plan

Case study B: Towards a culture of performance

Clear intentions - deliberate steps

Long term view

University defined ‘research-intensive’

Analytical approach with hard evidence

Recruiting ambitious researchers

Team of robust and determined leaders

Reduced and simplified the structures

Focus on niche areas

Addressed a culture of entitlement

Confront the low performers

Case study C: Kick-starting from a low base

Improving overall research performance eg:

shift in the internal budget allocation to research

DVC takes a direct role in selection panels for new staff

target associate professor level to bring in new talent

reduce administrative staff with long-term contracts

appointed middle managers who were researchers

themselves.

performance management that sends out clear signals

and…

International Studies of

Leadership of Research

Development

Key environment factors (Bland)

1. Clear, coordinating organisational goals that emphasise research

2. Leadership that is ‘research-experienced’ and highly participative

3. Recruitment and selection processes that bring in skilled,

research-driven academic staff

4. A positive group climate and shared culture that support and

highly value research

5. A mentoring program that advises staff on their research

activities, socialises them into the departmental culture, connects

them with relevant research bodies

6. Collaborations that help academics find new avenues for

research, stimulate their interest and advance their careers

7. Communication that nurtures professional networks and

promotes a culture of collaboration

Key environment factors (Ramsden)

Academics’ perceptions of whether the department is cooperatively

managed, with participative decision-making:

1. ‘Staff are consulted on matters of policy even when they are

not directly affected’

2. ‘Staff in the department often discuss research issues together’

3. ‘Teaching loads are negotiated cooperatively among staff’

4. ‘There is plenty of discussion on teaching and curriculum issues

among academic staff’

5. ‘There is little professional jealousy among the academic staff’

6. ‘Good teachers are highly respected in this department’

Leadership & environmental factors interact

Being highly regarded as a scholar – a mentor and peer model

Having a ‘research orientation’ – having assimilated and

incorporated within oneself the values of research and

scholarship

Being capable as a manager of people and resources, as a fund

raiser

and group advocate

Keeping the group’s mission and shared goals visible

Using an assertive and participative style of leadership (clear

objectives, expecting all members to contribute to decision-

making, making high quality information available, valuing group

members’ ideas and their ownership of projects)

Putting in place structures that facilitate productivity – such as

time allocations and reward systems

Understanding the workforce (McInnis)

Sense of academic identity critical to productivity and overall

work satisfaction of an individual’s autonomy to pursue personal

academic interests.

The main predictor of work satisfaction for academics, clearly

ahead of salary and job security, is the opportunity to pursue

their own academic interests.

Academic research is by definition about unpredictability and

personal commitment; it sits uneasily with management systems

that rely on command and control.

Because intrinsic motivation plays such a decisive role in

productivity, it is important for leaders to consider what factors

might attenuate this enthusiasm.

McInnis & Anderson 2005, McInnis 2010, 2012

Lessons from ‘world class’ universities

Uneven distribution of productivity; teaching focus; a

fragile base; barriers to new entrants

Clear directions and realistic appraisal; focus on winners

Research active, research uneasy, research negative

Recruit, re-invigorate, train, re-orient, enable

Reward, recognise and stimulate competition

Long term view

Strategies for newer universities

Towards a Set of Principles for

Research Development

Research productive

institution

A supportive environment facilitates productivity

when leadership makes the environment’s

features available to a well-prepared staff

Institutional factors Resources, rewards, time

Recruitment and selection

Mentoring that guides, socialises and connects to the external

world

Clear co-ordinating organisational goals

Positive group climate

The value of research understood by all academics and staff

Assertive-participative governance

Collaborative and active research environment

Synergy between academic and support functions

Quality and quantity of communication

Individual factors Early interest in research

Involved in research activity

High intrinsic academic motivation

Autonomy and commitment

Work habits

Skills and content knowledge

Leadership factors Distributed leadership

Effective communication

Strategic research focus

Research experienced – scholarly

credibility

Capable management

Clear goals

Participative decision-making

Prepared for a

supportive

environment

Creates a

favourable

environment

Research productive institution

Institutional

factors

Individual

factors

Leadership

factors

Based on Bland et al Academic Medicine 2005

1

Institutional factors

Resources, rewards, time

Recruitment and selection

Mentoring that guides, socialises and connects to the external

world

Clear co-ordinating organisational goals

Positive group climate

The value of research understood by all academics and staff

Assertive-participative governance

Collaborative and active research environment

Synergy between academic and support functions

Quality and quantity of communication

Individual factors

Early interest in research

Involved in research activity

High intrinsic academic motivation

Autonomy and commitment

Work habits

Skills and content knowledge

Leadership factors

Distributed leadership

Effective communication

Strategic research focus

Research experienced – scholarly

credibility

Capable management

Clear goals

Participative decision-making

(Draft) Focus 1: Create an agenda for change

Principle 1. Create a compelling strategic vision

What in means in practice:

Provide a clear-sighted assessment of the university’s performance

Decide where the university should be positioned

Make the case for change

Create a sense of urgency

Test the vision

(Draft) Focus 2:

Develop a research-focused workforce

Principle 1. Invest in early career researchers

What it means in practice:

Establish university-wide programs for early

career researchers

Encourage links to the research culture in

undergraduate programs

Focus attention of deans on fostering early career

involvement and interest

Draft Focus 3: Support change through

assertive-participative leadership

Principle 1. Devolve senior research leadership

and management

What it means in practice:

Clarify the research development roles of senior academic leaders

Provide opportunities for high quality senior research leadership development programs

Align the research strategy and performance indicators at all levels

Draft Focus 4: Build institutional

research capacity

Principle 1. Provide clear focus and incentives to

grow capacity

What it means in practice:

Translate the vision directly into key performance indicators

Ensure the research strategy and performance indicators are reflected at all levels of planning

Build the academic connections between areas of strength in research and teaching

Next Steps…