Research culture: let's reimagine how we work together
We want to hear your solutions to improve research culture. As a funder we need to play our part, and your role is essential. Achieving a successful research culture needs collective responsibility and change at all levels. Your ideas will help us to craft a set of ambitious goals for creating a better culture.
-
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
Thousands of researchers have taken part in the largest ever survey into experiences of research culture. Now we want to hear your solutions to some of the concerns that have been raised. Your ideas will help us craft a set of ambitious goals for creating a better culture.
Check out the ideas that have already been suggested below, comment and vote for the ones you think could make a difference. Or you can add your own idea following this format (you'll need to create an account to vote and add responses).
Add your idea:
Title of your idea/solution
Enter a short description (optional):
1) A brief description - who can make the change and how?
2) Examples of what you could do to support this change.
3) Stick to under 250 words.
4) If you want, you can tag your institution!
Help us make sure everyone feels safe and free to engage in discussions. Don't be rude, hateful or insulting--we will not tolerate this. You can respectfully challenge ideas but never attack the person. Check out our forum etiquette and moderation rules.
Find out more about Wellcome's campaign to reimagine research.
View All Ideasabout 3 years ago
Research is about more than researchers - value, recognition and clear career pathways for technicians is critical to good research
Technicians are often overlooked, are unable to manage research projects, be named on grants or progress in their careers, yet are fundamental to research labs. This should be supported by funders and institutions.
over 3 years ago
Sustainability
Can we make a move away from so much single use plastic and towards glass?
over 2 years ago
Don't just train academic managers, enforce policies!
There are lots of calls to train academics as managers and that is a good thing, but it will only help if policies are enforced. There is not enough time for anyone, but especially for academics and so they will only do those things that show an immediate benefit. For example, although it is already policy to give an appraisal for your staff once-a-year, this is seldom done. It should either be a disciplinary offence if you don't or at least part of your own appraisal should be to assess whether (and how well) you have done your appraisals. Simply going through the motions is also not good enough. I have seen so many tick-box appraisals! 360 deg appraisals are also a good idea, as are compulsory exit interviews for all leavers.
over 3 years ago
Reward institutions than plan for success
Encourage grant applicants on full time academic contracts (with teaching and research responsibilities) to provide statements from their departments that outline what teaching cover will be provided with the guidance that it is preferred that teaching will not be carried out by casualised staff (especially hourly paid staff) and that it is preferred that flex has been built into teaching planning so that research leave occasioned by grant success will not lead to poor working conditions for others. It used to be the case that temporary lectureships were created when absolutely necessary but with good teaching planning it's not impossible that necessary teaching can be covered without hiring new people.
over 2 years ago
Make applications for funding a dialogue
Too much public money is being spent on bidding for research funding as a competitive process where as few as 20% will be awarded. Many strong applications are not awarded because they do not rank highly enough compared with other submissions, resulting in significant wasted effort and time for publicly funded researchers in NHS and HE roles and underfunding for those areas which do not fall within the major priority groups. If the process of bidding was a dialogue with funders - specifically with the panel who will make the decision rather than programme managers - we could avoid much wasted effort and use more public funding to carry out important research rather than bid for it. We would also avoid submitting to calls where the chances of success are low and only those submissions which have been developed jointly with the funder - and therefore hit the buttons required for funding - make it to panel.
