1. Dealing with Research Management Lessons learnt through a literature review
Susi Poli on behalf of the
EARMA Professional Development
Working Group

2. Contents
Overview of the theory around research management (RM) and main issues arising from the body of literature
Professionals in HE and who the blended professionals are
Dealing with definitions of research managers (RMs), with the array of positions/tasks and with a minimum set of requirements
Other tricky concepts: working spaces and academic/cultural capital
RMs and all the other professional groups
Issues of recognition of role and contribution to research

3. The theoretical framework Professionals in HE
HE Professionals can be categorized on the basis of their approach with existing structures and of attitude to respect boundaries among functions and roles
bounded: old style-professionals, shaped around the “definition of own role in terms of maintaining well-defined processes as well as reluctant to deviate from core functions”;
cross-boundary: are performers using “boundaries to construct and modify their identities … actively work across a number of locales to contribute to institutional capacity building”;
unbounded: are those showing “a sense of being keyed into networks that facilitate the exchange of information and intelligence that can be invested in the institution … acting as a pathfinder”;
blended: have “an ability to work in ambiguous space between professional and academic domains … actively using a mixed background to advantage” (Whitchurch, 2006).

4. The theoretical framework Who the blended professionals are
Blended professionals are hybrid or multi-professional identities, to stress their blend of profiles, both of academia and management; so they appear as those neither part of the senior management team nor of the research staff (Whitchurch, 2008)
They have been recruited through “dedicated appointments that span both professional and academic domains” (Whitchurch, 2008b)
Not necessarily PhD holders, but individuals with academic credentials, such as master’s and doctoral qualifications, performing quasi-academic functions coupled with the possibility of moving into an academic management role (Whitchurch, 2008a)

5. The theoretical framework Who RMs are and array of positions and tasks
The array of RM roles seems as much wide as before and positions range from those traditional: research contract officer to outreach programme coordinator; from enterprise officer to information development officer; from national research programmes officer to the EU and regional one, from training officer, so on (Bushaway, 2003)
To the newer ones, met in today’s UK Higher Education (HE) job market, that include: research facilitator, doctoral funding development manager, researcher training & development manager, so on

6. The theoretical framework The minimum set of requirements for RMs
A minimum set of requirements for RMs should include:
- research skills, the laboratory environment and practice, ICT for research, E-search, introduction into the unit and the wider university, pricing research, working in a research group, IP, setting research goals and measuring attainment, writing successful grants, research results, writing up, contracting;
- non-research skills, presentation, writing for publication, setting deadlines, PM, team-playing in research, personal initiative-taking, communication and interpersonal skills (Bushaway, 2003)

7. The theoretical framework Working spaces where RMs perform and interact
Working spaces may be seen as inhabited by ambiguity with possibilities for boundary-crossing and fluidity of identity (Allen-Collinson, 2009).
Third Spaces of Collaboration are populated by multi-professional teams working together on long/short-term projects and are frequently characterized by a common spoken language (Whitchurch, 2008a); it seems a fruitful combination of expertise, from the academic and the professional side, aiming to achieve institutional goals
The shifting arena as the shared space of tension, where RM crosses into the academic domain. Reason of such a tension is that research, for its own definition, is intricately associated with academics, so that such a space comes to be the one in which all the tensions and struggles come up with evidence. But an increased understanding of this space could enhance collaboration and maximize effort and outputs (Shelley, 2009)

8. The theoretical framework Dealing with academic and cultural capital
Academic capital tells of RMs’ contribution to research and, more often, lies on the evidence that they are more academically qualified (with PhD or post-doc awards) than their counterpart academics (Allen-Collinson, 2009)
And just academic capital seems to belong more to new RMs (to mark the difference between traditional and new RMs) because typically trained as PhDs in the fields in which they work and so more skilled once involved in planning/execution of research projects (Schuetzenmeister, 2010)

9. The theoretical framework Dealing with academic and cultural capital
Shared research in the shifting arenas means production of cultural capital for academics and RMs
RMs’ cultural capital stands for accumulation and value of the research support capital that they hold
So that credibility and recognition of contribution to research lie (not on the title) but rather on accumulation of such cultural capital, namely their own form of managing the research activity, influenced by the local cultural context and the broader policy research context of HE (Shelley, 2009)

10. The theoretical framework Relationships with other professional groups
Issues of “moral exclusion” for RMs that, in some cases, seem to be invisible professionals (no recognition of contribution, role, over-qualification, so on)
Sometimes they have been marked as “others” by academics and, among negative labels, frequently named support or non-academic staff (Shelley, 2009)
But issues of tension come up not only with academics in the shifting arenas, but also with other administrators and professional groups in HE
RMs deemed as “othered” by colleagues and perceived as snobby people (Allen-Collinson, 2009)

11. The theoretical framework Issues of recognition of role and contribution to research
Over-qualification, academic and cultural capital, all issues impacting on recognition of contribution to research (Shelley, 2009)
What is going on about recognition across Europe: the Report on the Project to Create a Professional Development Framework for Research Managers and Administrators by ARMA (UK), other associations have shaped own frameworks, f.e. Vitae UK and its Researcher Development Framework or AUA UK and the Continuous Professional Development Framework
Research leadership and research management (LFHE tender ): “Investigating ‘Research Leadership’ in the context of a changing research landscape: a scoping study”

12. Bibliography
Allen-Collinson, J. (2009). "Negative 'marking'? University research administrators and contestation of moral exclusion." Studies in Higher Education 34(8):
Bushaway, R.W. (2003). Managing Research. Open University Press
Hockey, J. and J. Allen-Collinson (2009). "Occupational knowledge and practice amongst UK university research administrators." Higher Education Quarterly 63(2):
Schuetzenmeister, F. (2010), “University Research Management: An Exploratory Literature Review”, European Union Center of Excellence, University of California, Berkeley, Institute of European Studies
Shelley, L. (2009). "Research managers uncovered - Changing roles and 'shifting arenas' in the academy." Higher Education Quarterly, 64(1), pp
Whitchurch, C. (2008a). "Shifting Identities and Blurring Boundaries: The Emergence of Third Space Professionals in UK Higher Education". Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), pp
Whitchurch, C. (2008b). Professional Managers in UK Higher Education: Preparing for Complex Futures. Final Report. London: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education (

13. Thank you for attention and all comments welcome
Pleased to keep talking about these issues

14. Who we are and what we need?
Summary of questionnaire
Kristel Toom
Tallinn University, Estonia

15. Contents Results of Questionnaire Purpose Respondents Expectations
Professional Development WG
Report
Plans for next year

16. Why Questionnaire? Professional Development WG 2011 WG goals: Training
Certification
Need to know what members expect
To get input and
…to map needs
… to start with the PD framework

17. About the Questionnaire
The questionnaire was sent out to all members in November 2011
…and later to other professionals
Web Questionnaire
39 correct responses
You still have possibility to participate!

18. Responses by Country UK (26%) Estonia (13%) Spain (8%) Ireland (8%)
Germany (8%)
Denmark
Netherlands
Norway
Portugal US
Kosovo
Switzerland
Slovenia
Italy
Finland
Czech Republic
Austria

19. Membership Status of Respondents
Results
Membership Status of Respondents
Status
Period
49% individual
31% institutional
21% non-members
38% members since 2011

20. General Information of Respondents
Results
General Information of Respondents
Gender
Age 3%
51%
49% ✓
28%

21. Level of Education 46% have master’s degree
Results
Level of Education
46% have master’s degree
Mainly in fields of natural/biosciences 15 and
management/economics14
Unfortunately we didn’t ask experience in research…

22. Nature of Work Position Areas ☐ 
Results
Nature of Work
Position
Areas ☐ 
Position doesn’t show the scope of the work!

23. Years of Experience The majority of more experienced professionals!
Results
Years of Experience
(Sphinx moth)
The majority of more experienced professionals!

24. Expected Events for Professional Development
Results
Expected Events for Professional Development
Annual Conferences (65%)
Working Group Meetings (23%)
Regular Trainings (21%)
Expert Meetings (16%)
Certificate Trainings (15%)
Professional Events (13%)
E-learning (11%)
Country Visits (9%)
72% – organisation has a positive attitude to RM trainings
88% – possibly receive resource for participating
The majority have no preference in where trainings take place
44% attend professional trainings on regular basis
mainly organised by professional associations

25. Expected Areas of Trainings
Results
Expected Areas of Trainings
Research Management (27%)
Research Policy (17%)
Project Coordinating (14%)
Cooperation with SMEs (13%)
Funding Opportunities (12%)
Full Costing (12%)
Financial Reporting (11%)
Analysing Research Performance (10%)
Auditing (9%)
Project Writing (9%)
Contracting (8%)

26. How long should a training last?
Results
How long should a training last?
2 days (44%)
1 week (13%)
1 day (10%)
1 month (3%)
1 year (3%)
Depends on training and location

27. Results
Regional Groups
We asked how people would feel about EARMA regional groups idea
The response vas very positive
Attend (92%)
Regularly (46%)
Occasionally (46%)
Depends (8%)
Idea for future developments!

28. Professional Certification System
Results
Professional Certification System
How important you consider development of
a professional certification system for research managers?
Importance
62% has no certification system in their country
28% don’t know
10% have
very important

29. Purpose of Membership “It is a great organization”
“To share experience and expertise, to exchange practices, to compare my way of working and thinking about the role with others, to participate in WGs, to explore the filed of research management more in depth.”
“Networking and exchanging information with peers. I also hope that EARMA will develop the training offer to research management offices. I think there is a lack in research policy and research management training (most trainings available concentrate on funding programmes) and I hope EARMA will develop these trainings.”
“It is the reference association for the profession at European level.”
“I think it is a good idea to have a strong European Network for Research Administrators who can influence the EC and build up good research support.”
“Networking…”

30. Professional Development Working Group
Report and Future Plans
Kristel Toom
Tallinn University, Estonia

31. Action Plan ANALYSIS LEARNING OUTCOMES SKILLS LEVELS
QUESTIONNAIRE
ANALYSIS
LEARNING OUTCOMES
SKILLS
LEVELS
LIST OF TRAINERS, CATEGORIES
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING FRAMEWORKS
DESCRIPTION OF MODULES
TRAINING PROGRAM FRAMEWORK FOR EARMA
EVALUATION OF TRAINERs
LIST OF TRAINING COURSES
INTERVIEWS
CALENDER OF TRAINING COURSES
ORGANISING TRAINING COURSES
FEEDBACK

32. Existing frameworks, literature and ideas
Andersen, J. (2011). Global Professional Development: SRA AC: Montreal
ARMA (2011) A Professional Development Framework for Research Managers and Administrators
Bushaway, R.W. (2003) Managing Research, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Kulakowski, E.C. & Chronister, L.U. (Eds.). (2006). Research administration and management. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publisher.
Schlesinger, P. (2011). Global professional development – a US Perspective: SRA AC: Montreal
UniSA (2011) Fundamentals in World-class Research Administration

33. Research manager will take on the daily responsibilities connected with the research programme such as:
Financial management;
Logistics;
Infrastructure;
Human resources issues;
Quality assurance;
Project management;
Networking;
Marketing and promotion;
Sponsor management;
Liaison with the university;
Liaison with research services;
International and other collaborations;
Partnerships and links management;
Organization and administration;
Media relationships.
(Bushaway, R.W. (2003) Managing Research, Maidenhead: Open University Press. p )

34. Supporting research at a university level involves:
Assisting the process of making research grant applications;
Supporting and enabling university research contracting;
Undertaking commercialization and exploitation;
Providing information on research opportunities and its dissemination
Networking;
Managing sponsors (corporate level);
Marketing and promoting research;
Facilitating individual and group support in goal-setting;
Helping to set the corporate research strategy;
Developing policies and procedures conductive to the growth of research;
Assisting with research planning at every level;
Supporting research performance evaluation;
Encouraging cross-disciplinary research interaction;
Assisting with research costing and pricing;
Intellectual property management.
(Bushaway, R.W. (2003) Managing Research, Maidenhead: Open University Press. p 152)

35. Research administrators are brokers, translators, intermediaries, and helpers who value the long-term process. But mostly, research administrators are believers in the vital importance of research.
Traditionally a research administrator’s role involves some or all of these tasks:
Understanding the nature of the principal investigator (PI)’s research;
Assisting the PI with pending funding opportunities information;
Promoting positive relationships between the PI and research sponsors;
Helping the PI apply for a grant or contract, especially through assistance with budgets, forms, deadlines, approvals, and signatures;
Recording and reporting on related institutional information;
Ensuring that the PI’s proposal complies with institutional policies and sponsor requirements;
Assisting the PI with the financial and managerial aspects of awards;
Ensuring the integrity of the institution’s financial and nonfinancial processes related to he research function.
(Kulakowski, E.C. & Chronister, L.U. (Eds.). (2006). Research administration and management. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publisher. p 75)

36. Training Modules 8 modules 3 levels Administrating Management
BASIC
(BEGINNER INTRO-DUCTION)
REGIONAL RESEARCH LAND-SCAPE
8 modules
3 levels
Administrating
Management
Leadership
PROJECT PRE-AWARD
POST-GRADUATE STUDENTS
TECHNO-LOGY TRANSFER
PROJECT POST-AWARD
FINANCIAL MANA-GEMENT
RESEARCH POLICY

37. Developing Professional Development Framework for EARMA
Professional Development matrix is based on
Results of the Questionnaire
Existing Frameworks
Literature
Own Experience
Our first unfinished version of PDF reflects
analysis of existing frameworks and literature!

38. A M L

39. A M L

40. A M L

41. A M L

42. A M L

43. A M L

44. Relation with other issues
Financial Issues
Legal Issues
Academic Affairs
Marketing
Communication
Statistics
Information dissemination
Personnel issues …
RMA

45. General Skills/Attributes
Integrity
Responsibility
Patience
Helpfulness
Empathy
Commitment
Sense of Humor …
Language skills
Team/networking
Computing
Time/Self Management
Critical Thinking
Problem-solving
Communication
Flexibility …
René Magritte
“The Son of Man” 1964

46. Thank you for your attention!
On behalf of the
EARMA Professional Development Working Group