Promoting equality, diversity and inclusion in research and funding: reflections from a digital manufacturing research network.

IF 7.2 Q1 ETHICS
Oliver J Fisher, Debra Fearnshaw, Nicholas J Watson, Peter Green, Fiona Charnley, Duncan McFarlane, Sarah Sharples
{"title":"Promoting equality, diversity and inclusion in research and funding: reflections from a digital manufacturing research network.","authors":"Oliver J Fisher, Debra Fearnshaw, Nicholas J Watson, Peter Green, Fiona Charnley, Duncan McFarlane, Sarah Sharples","doi":"10.1186/s41073-024-00144-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Equal, diverse, and inclusive teams lead to higher productivity, creativity, and greater problem-solving ability resulting in more impactful research. However, there is a gap between equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) research and practices to create an inclusive research culture. Research networks are vital to the research ecosystem, creating valuable opportunities for researchers to develop their partnerships with both academics and industrialists, progress their careers, and enable new areas of scientific discovery. A feature of a network is the provision of funding to support feasibility studies - an opportunity to develop new concepts or ideas, as well as to 'fail fast' in a supportive environment. The work of networks can address inequalities through equitable allocation of funding and proactive consideration of inclusion in all of their activities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study proposes a strategy to embed EDI within research network activities and funding review processes. This paper evaluates 21 planned mitigations introduced to address known inequalities within research events and how funding is awarded. EDI data were collected from researchers engaging in a digital manufacturing network activities and funding calls to measure the impact of the proposed method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quantitative analysis indicates that the network's approach was successful in creating a more ethnically diverse network, engaging with early career researchers, and supporting researchers with care responsibilities. However, more work is required to create a gender balance across the network activities and ensure the representation of academics who declare a disability. Preliminary findings suggest the network's anonymous funding review process has helped address inequalities in funding award rates for women and those with care responsibilities, more data are required to validate these observations and understand the impact of different interventions individually and in combination.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In summary, this study offers compelling evidence regarding the efficacy of a research network's approach in advancing EDI within research and funding. The network hopes that these findings will inform broader efforts to promote EDI in research and funding and that researchers, funders, and other stakeholders will be encouraged to adopt evidence-based strategies for advancing this important goal.</p>","PeriodicalId":74682,"journal":{"name":"Research integrity and peer review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11097576/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research integrity and peer review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-024-00144-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Equal, diverse, and inclusive teams lead to higher productivity, creativity, and greater problem-solving ability resulting in more impactful research. However, there is a gap between equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) research and practices to create an inclusive research culture. Research networks are vital to the research ecosystem, creating valuable opportunities for researchers to develop their partnerships with both academics and industrialists, progress their careers, and enable new areas of scientific discovery. A feature of a network is the provision of funding to support feasibility studies - an opportunity to develop new concepts or ideas, as well as to 'fail fast' in a supportive environment. The work of networks can address inequalities through equitable allocation of funding and proactive consideration of inclusion in all of their activities.

Methods: This study proposes a strategy to embed EDI within research network activities and funding review processes. This paper evaluates 21 planned mitigations introduced to address known inequalities within research events and how funding is awarded. EDI data were collected from researchers engaging in a digital manufacturing network activities and funding calls to measure the impact of the proposed method.

Results: Quantitative analysis indicates that the network's approach was successful in creating a more ethnically diverse network, engaging with early career researchers, and supporting researchers with care responsibilities. However, more work is required to create a gender balance across the network activities and ensure the representation of academics who declare a disability. Preliminary findings suggest the network's anonymous funding review process has helped address inequalities in funding award rates for women and those with care responsibilities, more data are required to validate these observations and understand the impact of different interventions individually and in combination.

Conclusions: In summary, this study offers compelling evidence regarding the efficacy of a research network's approach in advancing EDI within research and funding. The network hopes that these findings will inform broader efforts to promote EDI in research and funding and that researchers, funders, and other stakeholders will be encouraged to adopt evidence-based strategies for advancing this important goal.

Abstract Image

促进研究和筹资的平等、多样性和包容性:来自数字制造研究网络的思考。
背景:平等、多元和包容的团队能带来更高的生产力、创造力和解决问题的能力,从而产生更有影响力的研究成果。然而,平等、多样性和包容性(EDI)研究与创造包容性研究文化的实践之间存在差距。研究网络对研究生态系统至关重要,它为研究人员创造了宝贵的机会,使他们能够与学术界和产业界人士发展合作关系,促进其职业发展,并推动新领域的科学发现。网络的一个特点是为支持可行性研究提供资金--这是一个发展新概念或新想法的机会,也是一个在支持性环境中 "快速失败 "的机会。网络的工作可以通过公平分配资金和在所有活动中积极考虑包容性来解决不平等问题:本研究提出了一项战略,将电子数据交换纳入研究网络活动和资金审查过程。本文评估了 21 项计划采取的缓解措施,这些措施旨在解决研究活动中已知的不平等问题以及如何分配资金的问题。从参与数字制造网络活动和资金申请的研究人员处收集了电子数据交换数据,以衡量所建议方法的影响:定量分析表明,该网络的方法成功地创建了一个种族更加多元化的网络,吸引了早期职业研究人员的参与,并为承担护理责任的研究人员提供了支持。不过,还需要做更多的工作,才能在整个网络活动中实现性别平衡,并确保申报残疾的学者的代表性。初步研究结果表明,该网络的匿名资助审查程序有助于解决女性和有照顾责任的研究人员在资助获得率方面的不平等问题,但还需要更多数据来验证这些观察结果,并了解不同干预措施单独或结合使用所产生的影响:总之,本研究提供了令人信服的证据,证明研究网络在研究和资助中推进电子数据交换的方法是有效的。该网络希望这些研究结果能够为在研究和资助中促进电子数据交换的更广泛努力提供信息,并鼓励研究人员、资助者和其他利益相关者采用基于证据的策略来推进这一重要目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信