Research impact – what is it, after all? Editorial impact series part 1

Sandes-Guimarães, Luisa Veras de; Hourneaux, Flávio

doi:10.1108/rausp-07-2020-202

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Secondly , previously SDGs assessments were more directly related to their original purpose, or how to evaluate to what extent countries have been performing concerning their assumed SD targets (Sachs, 2013; Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Schmidt-Traub, Kroll, Teksoz, Durand-Delacre, & Sachs, 2017). Nevertheless, the SDGs have also been used as a parameter for the introduction or evaluation of SD in different areas or levels of analysis.…”

Section: The Sustainable Development Goals As a Reference For Research Impact In Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Editorial: The research impact in management through the UN’s sustainable development goals

Hourneaux

2021

RAUSP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Sustainable Development Goals As a Reference For Research Impact In Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second editorial aimed at presenting the most important models and frameworks for assessing research impact . Finally, this series' third and last piece dealt with problems and criticism on research impact (Sandes-Guimarães & Hourneaux Junior, 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: The research impact in management through the UN’s sustainable development goals

Hourneaux

2021

RAUSP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This publication is the last part of a three-editorial series about research impact. In the first (Sandes-Guimarães & Hourneaux Junior, 2020), we presented the main concepts and ideas that define research impact. In the second (Hourneaux Junior & Sandes-Guimarães, 2020), we discussed the most important models and frameworks for assessing research impact in the literature.…”

Section: Research Impact – How To Deal With It? Editorial Impact Series Partmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial

Sandes-Guimarães

Hourneaux

2021

RAUSP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This publication is the last part of a three-editorial series about research impact. In the first (Sandes-Guimarães & Hourneaux Junior, 2020), we presented the main concepts and ideas that define research impact. In the second (Hourneaux Junior & Sandes-Guimarães, 2020), we discussed the most important models and frameworks for assessing research impact in the literature.If these two challengesidentifying and measuringare not quite enough, another task presents itself to researchers, universities and society in general. It is related to the numerous constraints and difficulties can be found in the literature regarding the research impact assessment.In this editorial, we aim to present the most critical (and controversial) problems and critics in the current debate on research impact and discuss some initiatives and possible solutions to those problems. Main problems and critics on research impactDespite its importance and extensive knowledge, literature also presents diverse problems and some criticism regarding research impact. Some of these issues are discussed next.Causality/attribution The attribution and causality issues are repeatedly highlighted in the research impact literature as one of the main limitations of impact assessment. Causality refers to the challenge in attributing impacts to a specific source or cause. Attribution means the proportion of influence or impact that can be attributed to efforts derived from research projects, researchers or organisations (Derrick & Samuel, 2016;Morgan Jones, Manville, & Chataway, 2017).Using a linear and unidirectional logic model, from inputs to impacts, one can have the impression that the research is solely responsible for impacting that group or community directly and measurably (Edwards & Meagher, 2020). However, it has been recognised that the path between scientific research and its impact is a complex and non-linear process, including several interactions among researchers, users and stakeholders and interconnections among research activities and their outcomes (Penfield, Baker, Scoble, & Wykes, 2014; Riley et al., 2018). In this sense, the impact or the perceived change derives

show abstract

“…In our previous editorial (Sandes-Guimarães & Hourneaux Junior, 2020), we presented and discussed the ways research impact is defined and understood. The readers may remember that the various impact conceptualisations may lead to some constraints and difficulties in search of impact itself, especially when it comes to management research.…”

Section: Research Impact – How To Evaluate It? Editorial Impact Series Partmentioning

confidence: 99%