Centralization and research governance: does it work?

Abstract

Title. Centralization and research governance: does it work? Aim. This paper is a report of a study to evaluate the impact and success of the United Kingdom centralized Research Management and Governance model. Background. Research is crucial to the generation of new knowledge and for the development of nursing services. However, poor research conduct has prompted a growing international impetus to govern and monitor research activity. In 2004, a centralized Research Management and Governance Model aimed at fostering a quality research culture through streamlining bureaucratic management processes was implemented across 14 primary care provider organizations in the United Kingdom. Methods. A questionnaire survey was undertaken in 2004 to explore researchers' experiences (n = 76) of the model across the 14 organizations, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with five research and development managers. The interview transcripts were independently thematically analysed. Findings. Governance processes were seen as useful or very useful by 36AE8% (n = 28) of researchers viewed, and 47AE3% (n = 36) thought they were a hindrance or not useful. Managers suggested that the model supported the research infrastructure and had reduced paperwork. The benefits of centralization were balanced against managers' perceptions of reduced autonomy and control. Conclusions. Centralizing research governance is an effective way of maximizing research resources, but researchers still may not value the process. Partnership working can streamline research governance mechanisms, but needs to be adequately resourced and transparent. This model could be of benefit to international colleagues who are charged with the management of research.

The 4 I’s of Entrepreneurship: A Study of the Entrepreneurial Perspectives behind A Failed Large-Scale Distributed Research Infrastructure

“…In contrast, other studies have suggested that Research Infrastructures may actually help centralise and streamline various managerial processes, under the condition that the organisational mechanisms are adequately resourced and transparent (Howarth, Kneafsey, & Haigh, 2008).…”

Can Lean Thinking enhance research administration?

“…In our study, Centralization of research administration has been proposed by the interviewees as a means to clear organizational focus and decrease bureaucracy. According to research, centralization of research administrations will help in making work processes flowing, linear, and less time consuming, as a larger number of research studies are processed in a single location [32] . This has also been shown to deepen know-how within the research administration.…”

Using the theory of institutional isomorphism to create a conceptual framework of the governance of clinical research in relation to National Mutual Acceptance

“…There are varying levels of regulatory control supporting the process. The USA and the UK, for example, have both adopted highly regulated governance frameworks (Howarth, Kneafsey, & Haigh, 2008;Manville et al, 2013). However in Australia there is no authority to force the uptake of mutual acceptance or centralised model of ethics review (Breen, 2005).…”