Developing a Research Impact Capture System Julie Bayley Coventry University Impact Officer Senior Researcher in Health Psychology Email: j.bayley@coventry.ac.uk Twitter: @Julie_covuni

Overview Context and Coventry University approach Impact Capture System (‘ERIC’) Experience and learning Overview of ERIC and BIDS impact module Key timeline of events from realising needed an impact capture system to having one ready for roll out What you have done  in terms of consultation and building the module (if you can provide a demo video of BIDS/screen shots etc may be useful as appropriate) Key barriers, challenges, opportunities that others may be able to take away e.g. tying in with HR etc Three key actions that people can take away with them

Context Increased impact weighting (REF 2020) and funder requirements Ongoing discussions on measurement, assessment and definitions Related drives eg. Open Access Increasing focus on how to embed change institutionally How do we develop a systematised approach? FIND REF DEFINITION AND QUOTE PAGE ETC FIND RESEARCH COUNCIL DEFINITION AND QUOTE PAGE ETC

Coventry University approach “Embedding Research Impact at Coventry” (ERIC) JISC funded project, May-Nov 2012* Develop and test a prototype Impact Capture System Commissioned by the VC to rollout across CU Programme of work to develop system and engage academic staff Revise / extend content and structure Academic, business and strategic consultation Strategic commitment and sustainability planning Aim: “Embed good practice in impact analysis in research departments utilising the combined expertise of Business and Community Engagement practitioners, information management specialists and academics” Develop and test prototype Impact Capture System (ICS) to plan and capture impact of research projects CU one of 9 funded projects in UK* Completed November 2012 Strategic commitment – strategy and posts JISC funded pilot, rolled out across university Innovated existing research management system to plan and capture impact Currently running consultation to address adoption: Content, functionality and acceptability Academics (n=28) and business support / strategic leads (~15): Feedback is positive with suggestions for improving system *http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/about/impact-analysis

Prototype development process 1. Impact needs analysis Business and Community Engagement 2. Create content Research 3. Technical process review / system adaptation Information Management 4. Pilot test system Talk through process of 1-3, then show system and show feedback from 4 WP1 Impact Needs Analysis led by BCE team WP2 Applied Research Impact Assessment led by Research team WP3 Technical Process Review and System Adaptation led by IM team WP4 Pilot Research Impact Assessment and Data Capture led by Research team WP5: Engagement and Dissemination lead by BCE team WP6 Project Management lead by the BCE team

Full rollout Embedding Pilot Consultation and engagement across faculties Purchase database Full launch Modify/ extend database External literature / guidance Embedding

‘ERIC’ system Built within existing CU Research Information Management system Add details of (multiple) planned impacts, those which occur unexpectedly or remove those which do not transpire. 4 steps to add an impact….. Plan impact (4 drop down boxes) Plan evidence Set/ receive email reminders Add/ update evidence

1a) Plan impact - choose area

1b) Plan impact - choose level

1c) Plan impact - choose type

1d) Plan impact - choose marker

2. Plan evidence

3. Set email reminders

Impact added

4. Add evidence / defer / update

Learning and experience Benefits of ERIC ‘Institutional memory’ Flexible system supports impact planning from project inception Build and monitor ongoing impact portfolios Reduced reporting burden for REF 2020 Support funding bids / reports to funders CU marketing, case studies and reputation building

Challenges Experience of REF 2014 Impact not well understood Impact is not static or universally accepted Very difficult to standardise across disciplines Scepticism and suspicion Control of information Ownership and attribution of impact Bridging academic / business divide Combining narrative with metrics

Consultation summary (Barriers) Frequency Time constraints and workload 18 Issues with research management system (access, familiarity) 12 Limited awareness and understanding of impact / benefits of system 9 System difficulties 6 Attribution and tracking of impact 5

Opportunities Accommodate non-funded projects Build academic awareness of system and impact Develop tools for enhancing impact planning / measurement Change of research management system Growth of impact culture

Consultation summary (Facilitators) Frequency Training and support 20 Raise awareness of impact and system 18 System edits 16 Link and embed across university practices 10 Utilise / report data (inc. REF 2020) 6 Improve ease of access 4 Increase relevance to academics / academic practice 3

Making it work…. Partnership is key ‘Engage not enrage’ academics Top-down support for bottom-up development Across-university system interaction Continued dialogue and revision Centralised and committed approach, locally translated

Next steps Continue building and rolling out system Embedding impact and behaviour change Build impact infrastructure Training System changes Dissemination (papers, reports, blogs)

Thank you and questions Julie Bayley j.bayley@coventry.ac.uk Twitter: @Julie_covuni