Exploring research capacity and capability in a local authority: qualitative insights from leaders and staff.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
James Woodall, Chloe Bracewell, Andrew Passey, Samantha Start, Jane South
{"title":"Exploring research capacity and capability in a local authority: qualitative insights from leaders and staff.","authors":"James Woodall, Chloe Bracewell, Andrew Passey, Samantha Start, Jane South","doi":"10.1186/s12889-025-23705-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Local authorities in England are ideally placed to address the social determinants of health in the communities they serve. An evidence-led approach to developing programmes and policies to tackle determinants of health is critical to ensuring outcomes are attained and resources are used appropriately. Previous studies though suggest that local authorities do not always use evidence consistently in their decision-making processes. This paper seeks therefore to explore perceived research capability and capacity across one local authority in northern England to understand how research influences policy and practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A qualitative exploration of 29 leaders and managers across the local authority, representing the four directorates of the organisation, was obtained to gain an overall understanding of research capacity and capability. Data were analysed thematically with eight overarching thematic categories derived.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The capacity and capability for research across the local authority directorates varied. Some participants described departments within directorates as being research active where research was part of their core business. Conversely, some departments were engaged in front-line service delivery where research was not prioritised. In these areas there was a disconnect between daily working practices and research. Staff in these departments generally lacked skills and training in research, whereas those in research active areas often had professional training where research was incorporated. There was rarely a shared definition of research by participants and ambiguity in what constituted research was common. The local authority was perceived to gather lots of data, but this was often used very functionally to fulfil reporting obligations. Curiosity to explore data was often minimised due to work pressures. Links from local authority staff to democratically elected officials varied and research and evidence was not always routinely presented. The majority of participants recognised that reforming ways of working and developing a clear training offer around research would be beneficial to addressing health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Data demonstrated variance between research practice, partnerships and culture in departments where space for intellectual curiosity was tempered by service demands. There were exceptions to this, where departmental views of research were positive and leaders valued the research-informed culture.</p>","PeriodicalId":9039,"journal":{"name":"BMC Public Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"2461"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12261831/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-23705-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Local authorities in England are ideally placed to address the social determinants of health in the communities they serve. An evidence-led approach to developing programmes and policies to tackle determinants of health is critical to ensuring outcomes are attained and resources are used appropriately. Previous studies though suggest that local authorities do not always use evidence consistently in their decision-making processes. This paper seeks therefore to explore perceived research capability and capacity across one local authority in northern England to understand how research influences policy and practice.

Methods: A qualitative exploration of 29 leaders and managers across the local authority, representing the four directorates of the organisation, was obtained to gain an overall understanding of research capacity and capability. Data were analysed thematically with eight overarching thematic categories derived.

Results: The capacity and capability for research across the local authority directorates varied. Some participants described departments within directorates as being research active where research was part of their core business. Conversely, some departments were engaged in front-line service delivery where research was not prioritised. In these areas there was a disconnect between daily working practices and research. Staff in these departments generally lacked skills and training in research, whereas those in research active areas often had professional training where research was incorporated. There was rarely a shared definition of research by participants and ambiguity in what constituted research was common. The local authority was perceived to gather lots of data, but this was often used very functionally to fulfil reporting obligations. Curiosity to explore data was often minimised due to work pressures. Links from local authority staff to democratically elected officials varied and research and evidence was not always routinely presented. The majority of participants recognised that reforming ways of working and developing a clear training offer around research would be beneficial to addressing health outcomes.

Conclusions: Data demonstrated variance between research practice, partnerships and culture in departments where space for intellectual curiosity was tempered by service demands. There were exceptions to this, where departmental views of research were positive and leaders valued the research-informed culture.

探索地方当局的研究能力:来自领导和员工的定性见解。
背景:英格兰地方当局处于解决其所服务社区健康的社会决定因素的理想地位。以证据为导向的方法制定解决健康决定因素的规划和政策,对于确保取得成果和适当利用资源至关重要。然而,先前的研究表明,地方当局在决策过程中并不总是始终如一地使用证据。因此,本文旨在探索英格兰北部一个地方当局的感知研究能力和能力,以了解研究如何影响政策和实践。方法:对代表该组织四个理事会的地方当局的29名领导人和管理人员进行定性探索,以获得对研究能力和能力的全面了解。数据按主题进行分析,得出八个总体主题类别。结果:各地方主管部门的研究能力和能力各不相同。一些与会者说,首长级的部门在研究方面很活跃,研究是其核心业务的一部分。相反,一些部门从事一线服务提供,研究不是优先考虑的。在这些领域,日常工作实践和研究之间存在脱节。这些部门的工作人员一般缺乏研究方面的技能和训练,而在研究活跃领域的工作人员往往受过纳入研究的专业训练。参与者很少对研究有一个共同的定义,研究的构成也很常见。人们认为地方当局收集了大量数据,但这些数据往往被非常有效地用于履行报告义务。由于工作压力,探索数据的好奇心往往被最小化。地方当局工作人员与民主选举的官员之间的联系各不相同,研究和证据并不总是定期提出。大多数与会者认识到,改革工作方式和围绕研究制定明确的培训方案将有利于解决健康问题。结论:数据表明,在服务需求调节求知欲空间的部门中,研究实践、伙伴关系和文化之间存在差异。当然也有例外,部门对研究的看法是积极的,领导者重视研究知情的文化。
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
BMC Public Health
BMC Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
4.40%
发文量
2108
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Public Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on the epidemiology of disease and the understanding of all aspects of public health. The journal has a special focus on the social determinants of health, the environmental, behavioral, and occupational correlates of health and disease, and the impact of health policies, practices and interventions on the community.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信