Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Stakeholders’ views on an institutional dashboard with metrics for responsible research

View through CrossRef
Abstract Background Concerns about research waste have fueled debate about incentivizing individual researchers and research institutions to conduct responsible research. Instead of looking at impact factors or grants, research institutions should be assessed based on indicators that pertain to responsible research. In this study, we showed stakeholders a proof-of-principle dashboard with quantitative metrics that visualized responsible research performance on a German University Medical Center (UMC) level. Our research question was: What are stakeholders’ views on a dashboard that displays the adoption of responsible research practices on a UMC-level? Methods We recruited different stakeholders to participate in an online interview. Stakeholders included UMC leadership, support staff, funders, and experts in responsible research. We asked interviewees to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of this institutional dashboard approach and enquired their perceptions of the metrics it included. The interviews were recorded and transcribed. We applied content analysis to understand what stakeholders considered the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of the dashboard and its metrics. Results We interviewed 28 international stakeholders (60% German). Overall, interviewees thought the dashboard was helpful in seeing where an institution stands and appreciated the fact that the metrics were based on concrete behaviors. Main weaknesses included the lack of a narrative explaining the choice of the metrics covered. Interviewees considered the dashboard a good opportunity to initiate change and hoped the dashboard could be supplemented with other indicators in the future. They feared that making the dashboard public might risk incorrect interpretation of the metrics and put UMCs in a bad light. Discussion While the feedback was given specifically to our proof-of-principle dashboard, our findings indicate that discussion with stakeholders is needed to develop an overarching framework governing responsible research on an institutional level, and to involve research-performing organizations.
Title: Stakeholders’ views on an institutional dashboard with metrics for responsible research
Description:
Abstract Background Concerns about research waste have fueled debate about incentivizing individual researchers and research institutions to conduct responsible research.
Instead of looking at impact factors or grants, research institutions should be assessed based on indicators that pertain to responsible research.
In this study, we showed stakeholders a proof-of-principle dashboard with quantitative metrics that visualized responsible research performance on a German University Medical Center (UMC) level.
Our research question was: What are stakeholders’ views on a dashboard that displays the adoption of responsible research practices on a UMC-level? Methods We recruited different stakeholders to participate in an online interview.
Stakeholders included UMC leadership, support staff, funders, and experts in responsible research.
We asked interviewees to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of this institutional dashboard approach and enquired their perceptions of the metrics it included.
The interviews were recorded and transcribed.
We applied content analysis to understand what stakeholders considered the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of the dashboard and its metrics.
Results We interviewed 28 international stakeholders (60% German).
Overall, interviewees thought the dashboard was helpful in seeing where an institution stands and appreciated the fact that the metrics were based on concrete behaviors.
Main weaknesses included the lack of a narrative explaining the choice of the metrics covered.
Interviewees considered the dashboard a good opportunity to initiate change and hoped the dashboard could be supplemented with other indicators in the future.
They feared that making the dashboard public might risk incorrect interpretation of the metrics and put UMCs in a bad light.
Discussion While the feedback was given specifically to our proof-of-principle dashboard, our findings indicate that discussion with stakeholders is needed to develop an overarching framework governing responsible research on an institutional level, and to involve research-performing organizations.

Related Results

Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Abstract The rapid growth of open access publishing (OAP) has significantly improved the accessibility and dissemination of scientific knowledge. However, this expansion has also c...
Aplikasi Dashboard Visualisasi Data Calon Mahasiswa Baru mengunakan Metabase
Aplikasi Dashboard Visualisasi Data Calon Mahasiswa Baru mengunakan Metabase
New student data Information systems can be used as a supporting tool to support decisions. Janabadra University is one of the universities in Yogyakarta, the information system fo...
Developing guidelines for research institutions
Developing guidelines for research institutions
As introduced in Chapter 1, in this thesis, I developed guidelines to research institutions on how to foster research integrity. I did this by exploring how research institutions c...
Social innovation : understanding selected Durban-based interior designers' perceptions of socially responsible interior design
Social innovation : understanding selected Durban-based interior designers' perceptions of socially responsible interior design
In a world with pressing social issues that require the collaboration of multiple stakeholders to solve them, this research sought to find out through the views of interior design ...
Institutional varieties and entrepreneurship: an empirical analysis
Institutional varieties and entrepreneurship: an empirical analysis
A growing body of literature on comparative international entrepreneurship has focussed on exploring the factors that explain differences in entrepreneurial activity across countri...
Steam & Power Dashboard
Steam & Power Dashboard
Abstract— The development of the Steam and Power Dashboard represents a significant advancement in energy management practices for industrial plants. By integrating data from steam...
Harmonization and streamlining of research oversight for pragmatic clinical trials
Harmonization and streamlining of research oversight for pragmatic clinical trials
The oversight of research involving human participants is a complex process that requires institutional review board review as well as multiple non-institutional review board insti...

Back to Top