Abstract:
"Good" research aims to not only achieve project outcomes, but to advance theoretical understanding, shape policy or inform practice. As such, the results of research projects appear in many forms, but are most commonly reported in scientific journals or reports of an academic nature. This is certainly important and significant and one would expect this to remain expected practice. However, in the applied disciplines, one can’t help to ask at times not how many reports can be done, but how many lives will be improved by the findings of a particular (sometimes hugely funded) project. Governments around the world have been facing increasing demands for greater accountability and efficiency in their public investment in research. In fact, organizations on the whole that fund research are under increasing pressure to demonstrate that they provide "value for money." Practitioners in the applied sciences are increasingly expected to integrate practice activities with scientific "evidence." In fact, it has become a matter of survival for a great many practitioners in applied disciplines to become involved in evidence-based practice in the organisations where they are working. Yet, while these approaches of accountability provide important impetus to practice, it neglects to address the question of how we advance the impact of research in practice. This paper aims to use the Buxton and Hanney Payback Framework (1996) to discuss the potential impact of practice research and to identify challenges and opportunities in advancing the impact. As part of this discussion, the following elements will be explored: • research production (ensure that users’ needs are identified) • capacity building (ensure knowledge transition and diffusion of innovations) • product development (translate research results into practical applications for “users” of research) • well-being benefits (aim to improve the lives of those we research) • broader economic benefits (understand the effects of policies and programmes)