This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Average research productivity perceived to be low • McGill ranked 7th in published papers per capita in 1990-1999 and in
citations per capita in U. of Alberta study, (Erkut Can. J. of Admin. Sciences 2002)
• Lagged U. of Toronto, McMaster, UBC, Queens (on publications but not citations), and Alberta (on publications but not citations)
• McGill ranked 57 in top 100 business schools in research as measured by Financial Times
• Lagged Ivey/UWO and UBC, but ahead of Rotman/ U of Toronto, Queen’s and Alberta.
• Management ranks below average on McGill research output proxy of grants per tenure stream faculty
• Measure “unfair” to research not requiring labs and assistants but “fair” in that this is basis for University attracting added resources: Canada Research Chairs, SSHRC small grant funding, indirect Federal funding, etc. and also one metric for ranking research universities in Macleans etc.
• Management Faculty research grants allocations averaged $900,000 or $21,000 per tenure-stream faculty member annually over 1996-2000.
• Conference papers not efficiently transformed into journal publications (P&T committee view 2002)
Steady research productivity would dramatically raise Management Faculty research ranking• U of Alberta study indicates that if each tenure
stream faculty member published even one ISI-ranked journal article per year, McGill would rise to top of research rankings• “Slippage” factors need addressing:
– New hires with fresh PhD may need time and mentoring to “gear up”
– Faculty engaged in administrative activities may face longer publication lead times
“Knowledge Management” of research activity missing--If only we knew what we know and do• Knowledge management of research activity needs development
• Example of good practice: social innovation research survey for Beyond Gray Stripes competition revealed large amount of research activity not known across faculty members
• Similar exercise was started but abandoned by globalization/international consortium because of discontinuity in research staff support (departure of Blossom Thom)
• Knowledge of what we do would help develop critical mass in research• Elsewhere McGill, key research themes and projects are widely
known both within and outside a faculty• Knowledge of what we do would help in developing links to practice
and to teaching• Now limited to “local knowledge” of a few people
• Need internal recognition / prizes for research excellence, as for teaching
Research should inform learning • Pedagogy Excellence Project (PEP) Report made some useful
suggestions, including the following:• Can bring research into the classroom by having Faculty members
incorporate their own research-related activities into their course curricula• Research on leadership, ethics and social issues can help develop
professional ethos of students• Expanded internships, including research-internships
• U.S. Boyer report on undergraduate teaching in research universities has recommendations
• Inquiry-based freshman year, use of projects in courses, structured involvement of some undergraduates in research by doctoral students and faculty; integrated courses
Learning can also inform research• Life-long learning activities create links between researchers and
practitioners, providing knowledge of current “theory in use”, current issues facing practitioners, and access to research sites
• “Reverse engineering” research to create links to practice• Taking inventory of industry contexts of our current and
recent empirical research• Targeting firms in those industries as likely clients for our
research activity– Example: research on promotion of packaged goods would
likely interest firms such as P&G, J&J, L’Oreal, etc.• Seeking ways to link some research streams to local
technology “clusters”: aerospace, pharmaceuticals/biotech, multimedia/entertainment, forest products, transportation, metals, etc.
• Could also explore benefits of linking research to industry associations (as opposed to specific firms), perhaps also other groups: Technovision, chambers of commerce, etc.
Critical mass requirements in relation to faculty priorities
Challenge of getting critical mass in relatively small faculty • Need to move beyond identifying “slots” based on critical gaps in
teaching to create critical mass in key research themes• Need interdisciplinary themes that can link to strategic
research priorities of McGill, community, and profession• Need to learn how to use research themes to build case with
university and external donors for added resources: CRC chairs, other chairs, funding for large-scale projects
• Need to leverage faculty research capacity through themes that cut across faculties, universities, communities, sectors and regions to engage others in helping develop our research
• Need to develop ability to “package” and “repackage” on-going research to link to emerging themes: emotions in advertising gets linked to decision-making in health management and persuasion in health social marketing
How to develop interdisciplinary teams • Two contrasting approaches to form teams –
• Top-down “push” approach (the three thematic consortia) • Organic bottom-up “pull” approach (perhaps team around
decision-making)• Do we need to encourage both approaches?
• What incentives are needed for bottom up approach?• Thematic consortia have been a useful start, but need to build
momentum• Need logistical support to develop team research grants• Need motivation (and incentives?) to develop team research
grants• Need motivation, institutional know-how and support to
establish one or more Quebec-style research centres (multidisciplinary but thematic) based in Management Faculty (examples elsewhere: intellectual property based in Law, digitized entertainment based in Music, GERAD based at HEC)
How to develop interdisciplinary teams - continued• Whether top-down “push” approach or organic bottom-up “pull”
approach to forming teams, we need codified (not just informal) surveys of research to identify research along themes
• Examples:• Social innovation (largely completed)• Health management (done informally, rapidly out of date)• Globalization/internationalization• E-commerce / e-learning / blended learning (large amount of scattered
activity – could be significant)• Integrated risk management / managing uncertainty (another “hidden”
research consortium)• Decision-making models (individual and group, rational and emotional,
also cross-cultural)• Blended learning as research theme: E3, VRQ, etc.
Encouragement for teams & consortia should not “leave behind” those wishing to continue the individual research model
Research support: funding, logistics & recognition - 1
Funding • Need to publicize and tap internal and external funding sources
• Need tap traditional sources (SSHRC, CIHR, NSERC, FQRSC etc) and learn to use themes to tap sources in creative way --- management science seeking CIHR funding etc.
• Need to use capital campaign to strengthen thematic critical mass • Need to involve external advisory bodies in suggestions for fund-
raising for research Logistics
• Need attention to link between research productivity and PhD program and its structure
• Need consistent research logistical support for publicizing funding sources and for research grant logistics (assistance with on-line forms and on-line CVs, budget tips and templates) and for grantsmanship tips
• Need logistical support, motivation (and incentives?) to develop team research grants and Quebec-style research centres (multidisciplinary but thematic) based in Management Faculty
• Need space for research assistants, post-docs, research associates, & labs
Research support: funding, logistics & recognition - 2
Recognition• Establish research prizes (based on overall record, depending on
rank): • Untenured initial 3 years (refereed conference papers, publications,
grants)• Untenured 3+ years (refereed journals, research grants)• Associate professor (includes citations, team grants, research program,
editorial board membership etc.)• Full professor (includes mentoring doctoral students and junior faculty,
citations, awards, international recognition, journal editorial boards etc.)• Do we need bonuses for publications in top journals as is done a
some schools (doesn’t sound like McGill?) • Can we agree on what are top journals in main fields based on
Journal Citation Reports or other sources to help guide junior faculty?• While all tenure stream faculty are expected to publish in academic
journals, should we recognize that publications in top practitioner journals (HBR) are more likely by senior academics with broader institutional knowledge and contacts?
Research support: funding, logistics & recognition - 4
Recognition - continued• Build on codified surveys of research along identifiable themes (examples
listed earlier on slide on interdisciplinary themes)• Need to keep Development Office informed of research themes• Need to link research themes to new research plan process being
established by the Principal • Should we establish a quarterly Faculty Research newsletter to circulate
externally (and internally)?• Can use contractual consultants to develop promising themes for
publicity and external funding• What is maximum number of “big themes” to avoid dilution? • Do we need to be more responsive to university needs in developing
themes? • Examples:
– Technology start-ups and incubators (much desired by McGill OTT)? » Possible added link to intellectual property research centre in Faculty
of Law– Governance (possibly desired by advisory board and potential donors)?
• Do we need Faculty-wide or decentralized working paper series on web?• Need to explore selective contract research around thematic strengths
Improving research productivity - R3 (revitalizing renowned research?)• Is concentrated teaching in one term appropriate route
to better research productivity?• Are condensed courses by junior faculty (as at LBS)
appropriate route to better research productivity?• Are summer scholar/mentors (external scholars
who come for a month to work with junior faculty on research projects) an effective way to mentor junior faculty in areas that have few senior members?
• To move more conference papers into better journals, do we need “master” workshops on publishing skills (similar to publishing course for doctoral students offered in Strategy by Ann Langley at HEC)?
Understanding and improving the research “business model”• Traditional McGill/Canadian research business model
• Continuous stream of research grants and publications• Develop research team around theme research program including
doctoral students, post-docs, research associates.• Develop MSc program as feeder program for doctoral program and
reduce time to completion• Develop multidisciplinary research centre around focused theme
and get university matching funding and Quebec research team funding
• Base case for increased number of doctoral students on training opportunities with outstanding high calibre research team
• Get federal infrastructure funding for centre (CFI grants)• Build critical mass with research release stipends and CRC chairs• As success builds, tap into non-governmental foundations in
Canada and elsewhere• Work towards international recognition to become member of Royal
Understanding and improving the research “business model” - continued• Non-traditional research business model for a management
faculty? (for example see Rand Graduate School http://www.rgs.edu/)• Develop contract research around consortia themes• Develop contract research around hub-and-spoke clients• Fund larger number of doctoral students through contract
research• Recruit doctoral students around current contract themes• Develop research internships to supply contract research• Develop MSc program to feed needs of hub-and-spoke clients and
support doctoral teams engaged in contract research• Build development case around responsiveness to current
themes of client organizations• Develop executive programs around findings from thematic
research Is there a hybrid research “business model”? Is there a third model?