Practicing Effective Stakeholder Engagement for Impactful Research

Ilias O. Pappas;Polyxeni Vassilakopoulou;Leona Chandra Kruse;Sandeep Purao
{"title":"Practicing Effective Stakeholder Engagement for Impactful Research","authors":"Ilias O. Pappas;Polyxeni Vassilakopoulou;Leona Chandra Kruse;Sandeep Purao","doi":"10.1109/TTS.2023.3296991","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars acknowledge that achieving societal impact should be a key aim of research. However, societal impact usually becomes tangible only long after research completion, so that scholars can hardly report its evidence in a research article, if it is to be published in a timely manner. Interventionist research methods that involve engagement with stakeholders to generate solutions for real-world problem situations can provide a path towards direct societal impact. We argue that achieving such impact requires effective engagement with careful attention to the timing of engagement and inclusiveness of stakeholders – drawing on examples from our own research projects. Our analyses suggest that the research team needs to make choices to structure engagement efforts across research phases spanning problem definition, solution design, and solution evaluation. These choices define a space of possibilities that a research team can navigate based on considerations of access, research setting, research approach, and researcher expertise. We map these to three specific interventionist research approaches: Action Research, Clinical Research, and Action Design Research to highlight the alternatives. The paper concludes by pointing out that interventionist approaches can create favorable conditions but require the judicious exercise of choices by the research team to generate outcomes with direct societal impact.","PeriodicalId":73324,"journal":{"name":"IEEE transactions on technology and society","volume":"4 3","pages":"248-254"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE transactions on technology and society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10186377/","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Scholars acknowledge that achieving societal impact should be a key aim of research. However, societal impact usually becomes tangible only long after research completion, so that scholars can hardly report its evidence in a research article, if it is to be published in a timely manner. Interventionist research methods that involve engagement with stakeholders to generate solutions for real-world problem situations can provide a path towards direct societal impact. We argue that achieving such impact requires effective engagement with careful attention to the timing of engagement and inclusiveness of stakeholders – drawing on examples from our own research projects. Our analyses suggest that the research team needs to make choices to structure engagement efforts across research phases spanning problem definition, solution design, and solution evaluation. These choices define a space of possibilities that a research team can navigate based on considerations of access, research setting, research approach, and researcher expertise. We map these to three specific interventionist research approaches: Action Research, Clinical Research, and Action Design Research to highlight the alternatives. The paper concludes by pointing out that interventionist approaches can create favorable conditions but require the judicious exercise of choices by the research team to generate outcomes with direct societal impact.
实践有效的利益相关者参与有影响力的研究
学者们承认,实现社会影响应该是研究的一个关键目标。然而,社会影响通常在研究完成后很长一段时间才会显现出来,因此学者很难在研究文章中报告其证据,如果要及时发表的话。干预主义研究方法涉及与利益相关者接触,为现实世界的问题情境提供解决方案,可以为直接的社会影响提供途径。我们认为,实现这种影响需要有效的参与,并仔细关注参与的时机和利益相关者的包容性——借鉴我们自己的研究项目中的例子。我们的分析表明,研究团队需要在跨越问题定义、解决方案设计和解决方案评估的研究阶段做出选择,以构建参与工作。这些选择定义了一个研究团队可以根据访问、研究环境、研究方法和研究人员专业知识进行导航的可能性空间。我们将其映射到三种具体的干预主义研究方法:行动研究、临床研究和行动设计研究,以突出替代方案。论文最后指出,干预主义方法可以创造有利条件,但需要研究团队明智地做出选择,以产生具有直接社会影响的结果。
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
×
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