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 Ideasover 1 year ago
'Hidden' work recognition and remuneration
All work should be recognised and remunerated. For instance, some expected activities currently not remunerated (in the majority of cases) are peer-reviewing articles/reports, peer-reviewing grant proposals, advisory roles. Those are crucial activities to warrant the quality of research but the current environment does not value or favour them. Funders and journals could remunerate those activities and employers could take them into account.
over 1 year ago
Create and share examples of what bullying looks like in academia.
Bullying
12 months ago
Give PhDs training on how to write a grant, how to get a paper published etc
Teach them this early to encourage independence and ownership
over 1 year ago
People's ability to work beyond hours and produce output naturally varies through the life-course. More allowance should be made for this.
Institutions, grant-awarding boards and people in management should be made to consider that a person's ability to produce output as measured by e.g. ref can vary throughout their lives, for example, if sick or have caring responsibility. This is a normal part of life for everyone, but is especially true for women with small children, carers, those with mental health difficulties. These people should be judged on the quality of their work, in the expectation that quantity may fluctuate. This is a diversity issue, because disadvantaged minorities may be hit harder in terms of ability to access or afford certain solutions (such as childcare or accommodation close to workplace). Many managers may have not experienced this in their own lives or have been able to overcome fairly easily, but should be aware it is not always so easy for others.
over 1 year ago
Accountability through audit and appropriate reporting.
When a PI receives a grant, they obtain an incredible amount of power, and with this, responsibility. However, I have not seen funders hold PIs to account and this has resulted in terrible abuses of power, poor practice, and ultimately, terrible returns (scientifically, economically, and on the health of the individuals involved) on research funding. This is solvable though, through funders increasing the accountability. By auditing the PI and their group, talking to the people doing the work, and truly assessing the output (not just scientific) of the funded research, a better system will evolve that judges the PI more holistically and can help guide their future funding applications. Sadly, heads of departments, from my observed experiences, seem dis-engaged and don't really have any interest to cause trouble for a PI bringing in grant money, at the expenses of a solitary PhD or Post-doc employee. Therefore, the grant funders, who are in charge of the purse strings, must step up their efforts to help improve the research culture and outputs by prioritising and assessing the appropriate outputs.
