IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v7y2020i1d10.1057_s41599-020-00629-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic incentives for enhancing faculty engagement with decision-makers—considerations and recommendations from one School of Public Health

Author

Listed:
  • Nasreen S. Jessani

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
    Stellenbosch University
    University of Johannesburg)

  • Akshara Valmeekanathan

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Carly M. Babcock

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
    Maryland Department of Health)

  • Brenton Ling

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
    Population Health Alliance)

Abstract

In academia, faculty are bound by three pillars of scholarship: Teaching, Research and Service. Academic promotion and tenure depend on metrics of assessment for these three pillars. However, what is and is not acceptable as “service” is often nebulous and left to the discretion of internal committees. With evolving requirements by funders to demonstrate wider impacts of research, we were keen to understand the financial and non-financial incentives for academic faculty to engage in knowledge translation and research utilization. Between November 2017–February 2018, 52 faculty from one School of Public Health (SPH) were interviewed. Data was analyzed using Atlas.Ti and furthermore with framework analysis. The appeal of incentives varied according to personal values, previous experiences, relevance of research to decision-making, individual capacities, and comfort ranging from instinctive support to reflexive resistance. Discussions around types of incentives elicited a plethora of ideas within 4 different categories: (a) Monetary Support, (b) Professional Recognition, (c) Academic Promotion, and (d) Capacity Enhancement. However, concerns included adverse incentives, disadvantaging suboptimally-equipped faculty, risk of existing efforts going unnoticed, vaguely defined evaluation metrics, and the impacts on promotion given that engagement activities often occur outside of the traditional grant cycle. With a shift in funder requests to demonstrate greater social return on their research investments, as well as renewed global attention to research, science and evidence for decision making, SPHs such as this one, are likely going to be concerned about the implications of an enhanced “service” pillar on the other two pillars: teaching and research. The role of incentives in enhancing academic engagement with policy and practice is therefore neither simple nor universally ideal. A tempered approach that considers the various professional aspirations of faculty, the capacities required, organisational culture of values around specific discovery sciences, funder conditions, as well as alignment with the institution’s mission is critical. Deliberations on incentives leads to a larger debate on how to we shift the culture of academia beyond incentives for individuals who are engagement-inclined to institutions that are engagement-ready, without imposing on or penalizing faculty who are choice-disengaged.

Suggested Citation

  • Nasreen S. Jessani & Akshara Valmeekanathan & Carly M. Babcock & Brenton Ling, 2020. "Academic incentives for enhancing faculty engagement with decision-makers—considerations and recommendations from one School of Public Health," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:7:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-00629-1
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-020-00629-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-020-00629-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-020-00629-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friedman, Joseph & Silberman, Jonathan, 2003. "University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 17-30, January.
    2. Kothari, Anita & Wathen, C. Nadine, 2013. "A critical second look at integrated knowledge translation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 187-191.
    3. Longest Jr., B.B. & Huber, G.A., 2010. "Schools of Public Health and the Health of the Public: Enhancing the Capabilities of Faculty to Be Influential in Policymaking," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(1), pages 49-53.
    4. McAneney, H. & McCann, J.F. & Prior, L. & Wilde, J. & Kee, F., 2010. "Translating evidence into practice: A shared priority in public health?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1492-1500, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nasirov, Shukhrat & Joshi, Amol M., 2023. "Minding the communications gap: How can universities signal the availability and value of their scientific knowledge to commercial organizations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    2. Neighbors, Harold W. & Mattingly, Delvon T. & Johnson, Janay & Morse, Kayla, 2023. "The contribution of research to racial health equity? Blame and responsibility in navigating the status quo of anti-black systemic racism," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 316(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    2. Esteban Lafuente & Jasmina Berbegal-Mirabent, 2019. "Assessing the productivity of technology transfer offices: an analysis of the relevance of aspiration performance and portfolio complexity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 778-801, June.
    3. Battaglia, Daniele & Landoni, Paolo & Rizzitelli, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational structures for external growth of University Technology Transfer Offices: An explorative analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 45-56.
    4. Attila Varga & Márton Horváth, 2014. "Institutional and regional factors behind university patenting in Europe: an exploratory spatial analysis using EUMIDA data," Chapters, in: Andrea Bonaccorsi (ed.), Knowledge, Diversity and Performance in European Higher Education, chapter 6, pages iii-iii, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Federico Caviggioli & Alessandra Colombelli & Antonio De Marco & Giuseppe Scellato & Elisa Ughetto, 2023. "Co-evolution patterns of university patenting and technological specialization in European regions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 216-239, February.
    6. Munari, Federico & Sobrero, Maurizio & Toschi, Laura, 2018. "The university as a venture capitalist? Gap funding instruments for technology transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 70-84.
    7. Mario BENASSI & Matteo LANDONI & Francesco RENTOCCHINI, 2017. "University Management Practices and Academic Spin-offs," Departmental Working Papers 2017-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    8. Michael Sheriff & Moreno Muffatto, 2019. "University Spin-Offs: A New Framework Integrating Enablers, Stakeholders and Results," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Christina Öberg, 2019. "The Role Of Innovation Metrics In Innovation Systems," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(03), pages 1-15, April.
    10. Federica Rossi, 2014. "The efficiency of universities’ knowledge transfer activities: A multi-output approach beyond patenting and licensing," Working Papers 16, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2014.
    11. Rippa, Pierluigi & Secundo, Giustina, 2019. "Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 900-911.
    12. Patrick S. W. Fong & Xuhua Chang & Qiang Chen, 2018. "Faculty patent assignment in the Chinese mainland: evidence from the top 35 patent application universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 69-95, February.
    13. Sugandhavanija, Pornpimol & Sukchai, Sukruedee & Ketjoy, Nipon & Klongboonjit, Sakol, 2011. "Determination of effective university–industry joint research for photovoltaic technology transfer (UIJRPTT) in Thailand," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 600-607.
    14. Berna Beyhan & M. Teoman Pamukçu & Erkan Erdil, 2011. "Individual and Organizational Aspects of University-Industry Relations in Nanotechnology: The Turkish Case," STPS Working Papers 1106, STPS - Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jun 2011.
    15. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    16. Peter T. Gianiodis & Gideon D. Markman & Andreas Panagopoulos, 2016. "Entrepreneurial universities and overt opportunism," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 609-631, October.
    17. Edler, Jakob & Fier, Heide & Grimpe, Christoph, 2011. "International scientist mobility and the locus of knowledge and technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 791-805, July.
    18. Victoria Galán-Muros & Peter Sijde & Peter Groenewegen & Thomas Baaken, 2017. "Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 184-205, February.
    19. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    20. Aldo Geuna & Alessandro Muscio, 2008. "The governance of University knowledge transfer," SPRU Working Paper Series 173, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:7:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-00629-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.