Taxonomies As Boundary Objects for Social Change: Enhancing Visibility of Academics’ Impact-Related Information Behaviours

Introduction. This paper analyses taxonomies of societal engagement and impact associated with research as ‘boundary objects’ that mediate and make visible the information behaviours of academics undertaking this work. Method. The study uses ‘boundary objects’ (Star & Griesemer, 1989) as an analytic lens to explore institutional approaches in Denmark and Australia that classify societal engagement and impact activities. Analysis. The team used quad-ethnographic analyses of the taxonomical structures used in three schema - two used in proprietary research information management systems (Pure and Symplectic Elements) and one empirically designed taxonomy (ReACT) - to identify alignment and/or disjuncture with academic engagement and impact work. Results. The findings show proprietary system taxonomies limit the scope of reportable engagement and impact activities, rendering many academics’ information behaviours invisible. Adopting empirically derived taxonomies that more closely represent engagement and impact work can make academics’ related information behaviours visible, thereby informing approaches to capability development and tracking of relevant impact work. Conclusion. The study identifies the limitations and benefits of how each schema represents (or renders invisible) academics’ experiences of undertaking societal engagement and impact work.