Public Engagement and Career Strategies

[resistingreality]

Hi all, I'm looking for some career advice. In brief, I am in the social sciences and do quite a lot of public engagement and impact. I would say in terms of engagement, I'm running at about one invited event a week, of some sort, where I talk to practitioners/non-academics about my subject. I have also published a book which has had quite good cross-over in this respect and media coverage. In the last REF I submitted a 4* case study. However, my publication record is not as strong and I have realised one (not the only) reason is that this engagement/impact work is actually quite time-consuming. I am in a dilemma. My employer says that it values engagement/impact. The reality is that the only thing that leads to promotion, really, is journal publications (and ideally funding). But I see that the next REF seems to increase the value of engagement/impact again. So, should I drastically scale back on the engagement side to focus even more heavily on publications and funding? Or do I continue as I am? This might be difficult to answer but all thoughts would be gratefully received (I am currently languishing at SL).

My understanding is that 'Engagement and Impact' in REF2028 is going to count for 25%, which is the same as 'Impact' in REF2021. And the narrative material about Impact which was assessed under Environment in 2021 is being moved (back) to 'Engagement and Impact' in 2028, and will count for a minimum of 20% of the 25%. So, if anything, the value of an Impact Case Study has reduced slightly.

I'd suggest talking to someone senior in your field at your institution to try and find out what actually matters in promotion applications and what you personally need to do to have a strong case (what institutions say they value and what's actually valued can be somewhat different...). You might be able to make a argument based on the financial value of your 4star ICS, and its contribution to rankings. However there may be a limit to how much this can compensate for a perceived shortage of publications (or grant funding).

Former Director of Research (in a research-intensive place) here. In the last REF2021, a 4 Impact case study was worth more QR funding than around 3-4 4 publications.

So your work has REAL worth to your Unit of Assessment (UoA).

However - the Impact/Engagement does need to come from research which meets the "benchmark" ie minimum 2* publication. SO you do need to show this.

And we don't know yet what guidelines the 2028 REF will have around Impact etc from the previous REF. There were policies around that in terms of Impact from REF2014 developing etc for REF2021. They were trying to stop people "double-dipping" or just continuing, rather than developing new/innovative impact ...

So it's worth having a serious conversation with your DoR about how to shape your career going forward. To the REF Panels, the REF is about the UoA rather than the individual, but unfortunately individual universities use the REF as a performance management tool for individual academic staff (which is shit management IMO).

So you may need to re-balance your research/impact work a bit, particularly if you're looking at promotion in the next couple of years. But at my place, I know of at least 2 colleagues in my unit who achieved promotion as much on the basis of their impact work (one had a 4* ICS) as on their research.

Argh the asterisk on 4 * bolded everything!

That does sound like a very high number of events to be doing, I can see that you wouldn’t have much time for writing. It’s great that your work is having so much impact, but as you are in demand, it sounds like you might be in a position to be more picky and strategic about which invitations you accept, and prioritise those which are likely to have the most (new) impact. A good position to be in 😊

Definitely talk to someone senior about what drives promotions as it varies institution to institution (at my place grants are important but not everything). Aside from promotion, from what you’ve said here I wonder if you’re spending too much time in broadcast mode? If you’re spending so much time disseminating, then that doesn’t leave much time for developing new ideas, reading or thinking - which are also necessary for developing good quality papers and grants.

However - the Impact/Engagement does need to come from research which meets the "benchmark" ie minimum 2 publication. SO you do need to show this.*

This was the rule in REF2021. The proposed guidelines for REF2028 drop the 2 star underlying publication requirement although it is not clear how this will work in practice.

Thanks for that correction @acfree123 - I'm no longer DoR so haven't bothered to read much about the next REF. I have a couple of books & a multi-million pound grant for that already, so I've done my bit & I'm pretending the REF doesn't exist!

Thanks so much everybody - plenty to think about here. Yes, @wooqui being in broadcast mode does make sense. Although the area I research is highly topical - many events about it, lots of interest from practitioners, who are being pressured to work on this area. My (critical) approach is somewhat counter to mainstream narratives and so I think I am often asked to contribute on that basis, for which I have a (very small - don't want to oversell myself here) reputation. But there's a lot about this that relates to my identity as an 'academic.' This is a second career for me, and one where I am not at all sure I truly belong. I really admire more abstract, theoretical work but, for me, I always wanted my research to (also) speak quite directly to the 'real' world. Trying to balance those interests and demands is tricky, sometimes. I do need time to think about new ideas too.

Yes, I think you're wise to try to work out what balance is going to work - both for you, and your Department & colleagues.

Academia is its own thing, and anyone in a career in academia needs to understand this. And also accept that this is OK. In my field, where the professional practice (our industry "other half" IYSWIM) is precarious, I think sometimes practitioners see academia as "coming in out of the rain" and that it'll be doing what they've been doing, but being paid to teach it as well. And there's sometimes a bit of resentment at the way we do things, as if our practices should mirror those of the industry.

That's not what academia is. It's its own industry, and It's about research, and it's the research which needs to drive the teaching and the public engagement & impact.

Something that is constantly hammered onto us at my place is that impact, in REF terms, can only happen if there's an underlying body of highly rated (4* preferably) publications. So I was wondering if there's a fear that, as your publications become older, perhaps your newer public engagement work won't have that strong grounding on published research?

Could you perhaps try to develop publications from the public engagement events? i.e. in exchange for giving a talk at an institution, they give you access to data or to interviewees that can help you obtain the fieldwork you need for an article?

Hi all. Thanks again for thoughts. I should underline that my impact and engagement is underpinned by published research - including a book that has spent a while in the bestseller list (in a fairly niche category, I admit 😀). So it is research driven.

@aridapricot , as @acfree123 mentioned above, the '2star unpinning outputs' requirement is removed in the 'initial decisions' document for REF2028. (Although what the final guidelines will be and how institutions and panel will interpret them remains to be seen...)