This reflective inquiry reports on the experiences of a working group at Arizona State University (ASU) that, over the course of four months, built, integrated, and iterated artificial intelligence (AI) solutions into their daily work as research administrators. During this process, the group focused on creating AI solutions for the complex, repeatable, and time-consuming tasks across teams in Research Operations (ROps) at ASU. Through this collaborative reflection, featuring the insights of both the facilitators (n=2) and the research administrators (n=4) involved in the implementation process, this paper offers insights into early approaches and recommendations for strategically, effectively, and sustainably incorporating AI into the work of research administrators. Given the emergent concepts of usability, flexibility, and sustainability, this paper proposes three recommendations for AI implementation: develop educational materials, create space for iteration, and define roles and protocols.
Research funding managers require diverse knowledge, skills, and experience to provide excellent research support services. This study aims to identify the topmost critical knowledge, skills, and experience required of a research funding manager in higher education in Australia. A qualitative content analysis of the job descriptions of research manager positions in Australia was conducted. A total of 51 research funding managers' positions were advertised within the study period. Most of the positions (92.2%) were advertised as full-time positions, and continuing positions (58.8%). Twenty-three major skills (soft and hard skills) were identified. The most required skills are communication, interpersonal, leadership, problem-solving and analytical, and organization and planning, while 11 core knowledge areas were required. The most required knowledge areas are funding schemes, contract management, research landscape, funding and institutional regulations. A total of 17 areas of experience were identified. The most required experience includes grant management and administration, research grant system, leadership, management and project management. It was also concluded that a research funding manager must know about funding schemes, contract management, research landscape, regulations of a tertiary institution environment and grant development while experience in contract management, research grant system and project management are also germane.
Universities worldwide are increasingly employing professional research staff (PRS) to support institutional research missions of driving research revenue and excellence. A primary function of PRS roles is to support faculty in grant capture, particularly as funding bodies emphasize equity, diversity, and inclusion ([DI), knowledge mobilization (KMb), and Indigenous research. Due to their growing prevalence, PRS roles have attracted attention to improve their visibility and sustainability. However, they remain underexplored in institutional research settings, particularly regarding the pre-award grant landscape. This study examines the evolving roles of PRS in Canadian universities, focusing on their contributions to grant capture and the structures influencing their recognition. Using a descriptive qualitative design, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 17 participants, including PRS and research office leaders, from 10 universities. Participants held roles spanning [DI, KMb, research development, and grant management, offering diverse perspectives on the challenges and contributions of PRS. Thematic analysis revealed four key findings: PRS play multifaceted roles that blur technical and conceptual; PRS roles are perceived to be misunderstood by those utilizing their services; recognition of PRS efforts is inconsistent and often limited to informal or interpersonal contexts; and PRS work remains undervalued. Together, these issues perpetuate the invisibility of PRS work, challenging the success of current strategies to address visibility and highlighting gaps in institutional acknowledgment. Our results suggest that undervaluing PRS contributions risks limiting their potential and undermining grant capture success. This study underscores the need for deeper engagement with PRS experiences to enhance their roles and contributions in academia.
Securing external grants is essential for the nation's institutions of higher education where decreased funding for research and educational programs has triggered the imperative to find ways to supplement university budgets. However, there are many challenges that inhibit grantsmanship success, particularly for those at community colleges, including limited time due to teaching, advising, service and other scholarly duties, the absence of experience and grant writing skills, and the void of a culture of grantsmanship at the institution. To address these gaps at an urban community college, an internal funding and professional development program, the Hostos Research Center (HRC), was created and replicated the internal funding processes developed by Balaji et al. (2007) and Kulage and Larson (2017). The HRC aimed to educate faculty and staff on grantsmanship to increase the number of competitive applications submitted to external funding sources and increase the likelihood of success for those applications. The HRC internal funding competitions mirrored the processes used by the prior studies and awarded over $300,000 in grants over a threeyear period. Survey responses on the impact of the HRC indicated increased motivation to apply for new grant opportunities, improved grant writing skills, and overall awareness of grant opportunities.
Research managers and administrators (RMAs) face several challenges due to the various tasks and roles required in university research management. One of the challenges is their workplace environment, including job satisfaction. However, little empirical research has statistically analyzed the relationships between job satisfaction and its factors among RMAs. This analysis divided job satisfaction into Job content satisfaction and Employment dissatisfaction. Regression analysis statistically verified the relationships using Japanese survey data of 245 individuals. The logistic regression results showed that if RMAs experience Esteeming work content after employment, they have high Job content satisfaction and low Employment dissatisfaction. Some characteristics of RMAs were also significantly related to Job content satisfaction. Another regression analysis confirmed that high Job content satisfaction and low Employment dissatisfaction had significantly positive relationships with Affective commitment. An additional interview survey enforced these results. Affective commitment generally predicts organizational performance and employee turnover reduction. Thus, the results imply that specific approaches to improve job content satisfaction and employment dissatisfaction are necessary for universities and other institutions that hire RMAs to enhance research activities. Furthermore, the results provide valuable suggestions for RMAs' career development and emphasize the characteristics of RMAs as a profession.
This case study details how the University of Pretoria's Grant Management Unit improved post-award grant management efficiency and compliance. Using process mapping and Activity-Based Costing, the Unit identified and addressed inefficiencies, high compliance costs, and process bottlenecks. Activity-Based Costing provides valuable insights into resource allocation and cost optimization. This integrated approach offers a practical model for enhancing efficiency and compliance in resource-constrained universities.
Interdisciplinary research teams are crucial for tackling complex societal issues but often struggle with goal alignment, leadership, and communication. This reflective inquiry article explores expanding the role of Research Administration (RA) and Research Development (RD) professionals as team coaches to address these challenges and improve team effectiveness. A team science program was created to train RA and RD staff in team coaching, using both in-person and virtual activities. Coaches helped teams from formation through the development of research products. The use of team science-informed tools and activities supported these coaching roles. Findings indicate that incorporating RA and RD professionals as coaches is beneficial to faculty, providing logistical support and non-technical perspectives. RA and RD professionals saw this coaching role as a natural extension of their work, although interpretations of the role varied among coaches. This project underscores the potential for RA and RD staff to enhance their support for research teams, particularly those teams that may encounter obstacles integrating diverse perspectives and collaborating virtually over long periods.
Purposefully publishing a fraudulent scholarly paper is considered research misconduct and never tolerated in academia. True scholars work hard to create and publish work in legitimate ways. However, fraudulent publishers-companies that solicit and quickly publish research papers without review or quality assurances that evaluate, judge, and validate research-are increasing sharply in numbers with few checks. Deceptive practices in research have the potential to undermine credibility and legitimacy of honest academic work and the products of research. Here, we describe the growth of these ethically questionable publication practices, characteristics that are typical of them, and provide suggestions for best practices that should be utilized by research administrators, researchers, and their students to reduce negative impacts on research.
Research and development (R&D) is vital for economic growth, and external funding is crucial for developing countries like Egypt to compete globally. The European Union (EU) Framework Programs (FPs) offer significant funding opportunities, but challenges in accessing these funds remain underexplored for countries like Egypt. This study examines Egypt's participation in EU FP funding, focusing on the challenges faced by academic institutions and areas for improvement. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study combines an analysis of funding distribution with a survey of Egyptian faculty who have applied or expressed interest in EU FP funding. The findings show that Egypt's share of EU FP funding is modest, with a low success rate in securing projects. Key barriers include limited institutional support and a need for better project management skills. Opportunities for improvement include establishing grant support offices in universities and introducing internal grants for pilot projects. The study concludes that national and institutional efforts are essential to improve Egypt's success in securing EU research funding. Recommendations include creating support offices, increasing resource visibility, and offering internal grants to enhance international collaborations and boost Egypt's research ecosystem.
Research managers and administrators (RMA) play a vital role in supporting the research mandate of Canadian higher education institutions (universities, colleges, and hospital research) by aiding researchers to successfully obtain funding, comply with granting agency policies, and to manage collaboration. However, the role is not well understood due to broad scope, and RMA are not aware of career options, or skills required for career progression. To better understand the profession, and the skills required to perform responsibilities, the Canadian Association of Research Administrators Career Path Task Force conducted a sequential mixed methods study. The study included an environmental scan of job postings (n=120), an online survey (n=138) and interviews (n=9) to assess qualifications, skills, remuneration rates, duties, and professional development needs of RMA. Findings confirmed the broad scope (e.g., grant writing and management, financial oversight, research contracts, and ethics compliance.) Entry into the field has shifted, often requiring graduate degrees, making the profession appealing to PhD's seeking better work-life balance. Critical thinking, project management, exemplary communications, attention to detail, best practice in equity, diversity, and inclusion were skills identified as future focus for professional development. Mentorship was identified as critical to career progression, and fair remuneration and benefits facilitated retention.
Making progress on the 'grand challenge' issues facing society demands productive collaboration among academics and stakeholders both within and across disciplines and sectors. To facilitate such collaborations, higher education institutions convene a range of organizational structures intended to promote productive interactions. These structures carry a variety of names: centers, institutes, collaboratives, and laboratories, among others. Based on observation of the academic landscape for several decades, few of these entities realize their potential to make a substantive difference on the issue(s) they were created to address. In this paper we review the experiences of two University-based Centers that have had sustained impact over more than three decades. We offer thoughts on key success factors for cross-mission, cross-disciplinary and disciplinary convening structures that may be useful for those looking to establish such entities and/or re-boot existing Centers. Key elements discussed include a clear need for the Center; institutional support; incentives for faculty to engage; access to essential resources; a viable revenue model; flexibility and adaptability; and effective leadership and governance. Specific examples for how each of these elements have been operationalized in the Global Trade Analysis Project and the Center for Food and Agricultural Business, both at Purdue University, are provided.
Research administrators (RA) at institutions of higher education (IHE) provide critical support to faculty throughout the lifecycle of research, which include developing research, applying to funding opportunities, managing awards through closeout, and maintaining compliance. Fulfilling these tasks requires well-developed RA processes and clear customer service pathways for faculty. Metric collection on faculty satisfaction provides insight to how RA infrastructure is successfully supporting research and areas needing improvement. In 2019 RAs were surveyed on faculty satisfaction metric collection practices regarding processes and customer service, and if these metrics influenced change. After this initial data collection, the COVID-19 pandemic started and temporarily changed how research was performed, further impacting RA processes and customer service with mandatory remote work. Three years after the start of the pandemic, a survey was distributed to RAs to compare results and understand how COVID-19 impacted the collection of faculty satisfaction metrics. Results showed during the height of the pandemic there was not an increase in metric collection, however, within the last year of the pandemic, when RA offices were looking forward to a new permanent normal, there was a surge. The pandemic changed "where" faculty support was provided with initial necessary remote work; data showed permanent changes to the RA work environments with maintaining hybrid and fully remote work after the shutdown had ended across different types of offices and IHE sizes. COVID-19 impacted research, and this study examines how it impacted collecting faculty satisfaction metrics when RA offices were forced to pivot processes and customer services.
Faculty members at academic institutions are typically expected to participate in service, teaching, and research throughout their careers. Each of these expectations involves a multitude of activities, contributing to each of the areas of focus. With the recent emphasis on grant funding, this research sought to identify faculty perceptions of the purpose of grant writing. Participants of this study include both tenured and tenure-track faculty as well as STEM and non-STEM faculty. Using a mixed-method design, comparisons between tenure and tenure-track faculty were made as well as comparisons between STEM and non-STEM faculty. The overall project looked at the various myths and truths of grant writing and the purpose of grant writing per faculty perceptions. A total of 104 participants were involved in the study. Overall, the quantitative results indicate slight differences among STEM/non-STEM faculty regarding the six truths that were researched. Additionally, three themes emerged from the qualitative data indicating that faculty perceive the purpose of grant funding to be (1) to sustain/ support their own research, (2) to support/mentor graduate students, and (3) to advance science.
The article establishes how a membership association, following shared and intersecting strategies around competency and professional recognition frameworks, extends research management and administration (RMA) professionalization. Computer-mediated design using asynchronous sources provided data for thematic, narrative analysis within an interpretive, qualitative approach. The Association was found to be an expert organization proficient in using boundary-spanning strategies that were shared systemically to advance RMA professionalization, specifically in the Global South. Individual research managers and administrators (RMAs) also may claim their experiential spaces more powerfully, even in contradictory academic domains where qualifications are prized. This is supported by an open-ended system, emblematic of the complexities of this day. The setting of standards for professionalization of RMA has secondary, yet targeted, impact on policies and practices of funding agencies and governments who invest in science and research. The study has surfaced the nature of boundary spanning within RMA professionalization focusing on competency and professional recognition frameworks, areas on which literature is mostly silent. The strategic credibility of creating systemic'openness' across intersecting, yet distinct domains, has been posited.
Newly appointed lecturers joining teaching-focussed environments can encounter significant challenges to sustain a successful research career. Some of these challenges pertain to the existing work culture and the suitability of mentoring. At the same time, success in academia is typically associated with the "academic super-hero" model where individuals are expected to achieve excellence on all fronts and in short timescales. Here, we offer a complementary model: the research collective. The research collective is defined as a self-formed group of researchers (irrespective of specialism) supporting each other and presenting themselves united when aiming to promote both their own research, and when promoting the value of research in their department, thereby creating around them an empowering proximate research culture. The advantages of this new model are outlined, and illustrated using the Earth, Ecology and Environment research collective, as an example. Key benefits are described in terms of: i. enhancing the proximal and institutional research culture, ii. promoting the image of the research collective's members to the outside, and iii. ultimately enhancing the research career prospect of individuals. Additionally, we suggest actions research administrators and other stakeholders within the university can take to support the development of research collectives.
Measuring the level of institutional capacity for grantsmanship within higher education informs administrators about the needs of their organization and where resources and institutional supports can be implemented to support faculty and staff. Receiving grant funding can lead to implementing cutting-edge programming and research support, which could improve the quality of education provided and, ultimately, student retention. While conducting an institutional capacity needs assessment is crucial for making data-informed decisions, there is a significant gap in institutional capacity research; specifically, there is no valid and reliable assessment tool designed to measure institutional capacity for grantsmanship. The present study aims to develop an assessment tool for higher education institutions to evaluate support systems and identify the needs of their faculty and administrators for grant writing efforts. The current study used a mixed-method approach over three phases to understand the indicators behind measuring institutional capacity for grantsmanship. We developed six reliable scales-promoting grant proposal writing, proposal writing (for faculty), proposal writing (for administrators), proposal writing (all respondents), submitting grant proposals, implementing grant activities, and managing awards. This study contributes to our understanding of institutional capacity and produced a reliable assessment tool to support grantsmanship.
Background: Expertise in scientific and grant writing are essential in health science research and practice. Quality scientific and grant writing are uncommon in Uganda which is partly responsible for the low quality and quantity of research outputs. To address this, the Makerere University Walter Reed Project (MUWRP) implemented Strengthening Institutional Capacity for Research Administration in Uganda (SICRA). Methods: SICRA conducted 3-day face-to-face and virtual training workshops in scientific and grant writing targeting early-career scientists (ECS) at institutions involved in health research and graduate training in Uganda. Mentorship and follow-up were by phone call, email and face-to-face meetings as required. To determine the effect of SICRA interventions, we conducted a quasi-experimental impact assessment among trainees using a semi-structured questionnaire. Results: 245 ECS attended SICRA workshops on grant writing (37.2%), scientific writing (33.3%), or both (28.2%). Seventy-eight trainees (32%) participated in the impact assessment. A majority of respondents (60.3%) had a master's degree; 83% were full-time employees at a research or academic institution and 97.4% were involved in health research. Before SICRA, only 34.6% of respondents had written a manuscript, 19.2% had submitted at least one manuscript for institutional internal review and 25.6% had been published. After SICRA, 66.7% had written a manuscript (p<0.001), 51.3% had submitted a manuscript for internal review (p<0.001) and 38.5% were published (p=0.064). Before SICRA, only 37.2% had submitted a grant proposal, 24.4% had won a grant and 43.6% had participated in grant writing teams. After SICRA, 64.1% had submitted a grant proposal (p<0.001), 42.3% had received funding (p=0.011), and 62.8% were participating in grant writing teams (p=0.02). Conclusions: SICRA improved ECS scientific and grant writing which led to increased research output. The 3-day training approach is appropriate for Uganda and similar LMICs.
Research development, also known in Canada as research facilitation, is a strategic approach used by research institutions globally to enhance research capacity and competitiveness. However, there is an absence of literature describing how the function is structured and implemented in the Canadian context. This descriptive study contributes some of the first empirical findings into the demographics, practice settings, and professional activities of Canadian research development practitioners. A survey was administered to self-identified practitioners affiliated with the two largest professional associations of research management and administration in Canada. Findings show that, similar to the United States, research development is a well-developed function at Canadian research institutions as well as a stable and mature profession. Practitioners exhibit a homogeneous demographic profile, reflective of current trends, and many work in both official languages. The prevalence of postdoctoral education suggests an alternative academic career path. The work performed is largely developmental, spanning the areas of grant development, research communications, research collaborations, development of researchers, and strategic research advancement, along with some research administrative functions. Regardless of research intensity, there is a common set of services offered across institutions, and the most research- intensive tend to implement both centralized and devolved service models. This study serves as an initial step in developing a comprehensive understanding of Canadian research development practices, laying a foundation for further investigations.
Emerging Research Institutions (ERIs) are notably one of the most impactful organizations in a state system for addressing social mobility, workforce development, and economic growth of a region. Cultivating research at ERIs often requires the faculty to expand their skill sets beyond basic research to engage students and communities. Faculty development infrastructure through a Community of Practice (CoP) can help faculty expand skills sets, plan a career, and work in more robust interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research teams. The purpose of this case study is to evaluate the experience of a cohort in a CoP designed for an ERI to position faculty for funding. The participants of this study are faculty that agreed to attend eight sessions of the CoP over the course of one academic year 2021-2022. Along with attending the CoP, participants agreed to complete two researcher-developed survey instruments and be interviewed post CoP sessions. Publication history, attitudes, investigator readiness, facilitators, barriers, needs, and proposal progression with regards to funding were assessed. Overall, participants reported enjoying the experience and demonstrated high levels of activation towards proposal submissions.
This collaborative and reflective inquiry-based paper critically examines accessibility within the research realm. We focus this inquiry on the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion and specifically address the challenges of establishing accessibility as part of the research enterprise. We acknowledge and reflect on the pivotal role accessibility for persons with disabilities play in an equitable research enterprise and reflect on how nuances in language, behavior, and power dynamics all play a role in creating inclusive environments. This reflective inquiry is a result of a facilitated workshop that took place at a conference attended by professionals working within research administration. Using an inquiry-based workshop approach, facilitators worked with workshop colleagues to discuss, regardless of job title, an ability to influence and shape a more inclusive and accessible system at all levels. Our desired outcomes of this workshop were to collate the collective experiences of our colleagues to uncover barriers and facilitators related to accessibility and to support and learn from our colleagues around ways to create an accessible environment that is a norm. What we find is that accessibility impacts everyone in some way, but it is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Collaboration and communication strategies present possible support pathways to more accessible environments.
