Over the past week, I have come to terms with the same questions that sometimes are unanswerable.
- What are the reasons behind this research?
- Why has this piece of research started?
- Is this research for publicity or/and to make an impact?
Those are the 3 questions that I have been asking each research paper and evaluation report I have read recently.
In a nutshell, there are many reasons why a researcher has investigated a certain topic or their area of interest. It could be to create partners in their field of work, or it could be to use the research as a catalyst to create partnerships for the future.
Starting a research project can sometimes be due to the fact of funding for the project or a necessity. Where a range of partners and organisations are involved. With this in mind,
Are we ‘researching’ or ‘manipulating’ what we need to know?
Every piece of research aims to make an impact!
….Does it really?
I don’t think every researcher has those intentions at the start of the process and possibly a high proportion of individuals look to add value to their career profile by writing many different publications in an area, that has no substance or credibility. There is a lack of dissemination in research mainly due to a lack of time and the pressures of income generation and publication ratings. But only the true value of research can be established when it is disseminated and used by non stat/research savvy individuals.
Recently, I posed a question on LinkedIn and two responses were influential to this article:
“Research that is simple to understand by the commons, can help the commons learn from it, will boost the social impact of its outcome on policy frameworks.”
“It all starts with an original idea, solid research methods and getting others as enthusiastic about the idea as you are yourself…”
A research methodology has to be simplistic, a repeatable one that someone could copy if they so wish; that also provides evidence of change or proposed change.
If the research is a proposal to network and possibly put somewhat pressure on others to follow suit, then which partners or organisations could the research impact, are they involved in the research?
I will bring you back to the starting point,
What is research?
Why do you do research?
Your in an elevator, with four other researchers and a CEO of a large multi national organisation. Each of you have around thirty seconds to tell the CEO what you do.
What makes you different to other researchers?
What is unique about your work?
So, what is research, should you be predicting what could/should happen in the future?
Or is this Insight?
How do little fish in research become a big fish?
Collaboration with others can become key to any researcher, it is a small world especially if you have your niche or unique area of work. Where certain gatekeepers of information could prove vital to individuals work and career.
But some researchers will only research with certain individuals, is this greed or popularity? Or neither?
An excellent piece of research is not excellent until it is completed!
Please tweet me at @Jakepryszlak with your comment from the above article and questions!