Evaluating Research Partnerships through ISO 56003 Guidelines, RRI Concepts, and Ex Post Facto Cases
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
3. Methodological Procedures
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions and Final Considerations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- UN Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (accessed on 6 January 2021).
- Salman, A.; Al-Hemoud, A.; Fakhraldeen, S.A.; Al-Nashmi, M.; AlFadhli, S.M.; Chun, S. Research and Development as a Moderating Variable for Sustainable Economic Performance: The Asian, European, and Kuwaiti Models. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sinha, A.; Sengupta, T.; Saha, T. Technology policy and environmental quality at crossroads: Designing SDG policies for select Asia Pacific countries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2020, 161, 120317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seturidze, R.; Topuria, N. A way of developing collaboration between universities and businesses in a time of COVID-19. Kybernetes 2021, 50, 1661–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De la Vega Hernández, I.M.; Barcellos de Paula, L. Scientific mapping on the convergence of innovation and sustainability (innovability): 1990–2018. Kybernetes 2020, 50, 2917–2942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Callegari, B.; Mikhailova, O. RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thapa, R.K.; Iakovleva, T.; Foss, L. Responsible research and innovation: A systematic review of the literature and its applications to regional studies. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2019, 27, 2470–2490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mendiwelso-bendek, Z. Community-based research: Enabling civil society’s self-organisation. Kybernetes 2015, 44, 903–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunwald, A. Research and Scientific Advice in the Second Modernity: Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, and Sustainability Research. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldstein, C.M.; Murray, E.J.; Beard, J.; Schnoes, A.M.; Wang, M.L. Science Communication in the Age of Misinformation. Ann. Behav. Med. 2020, 54, 985–990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gurzawska, A. Responsible Innovation in Business: Perceptions, Evaluation Practices and Lessons Learnt. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Souri, A.; Nourozi, M.; Rahmani, A.M.; Jafari Navimipour, N. A model checking approach for user relationship management in the social network. Kybernetes 2019, 48, 407–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahdad, M.; Minh, T.T.; Bogers, M.L.A.M.; Piccaluga, A. Joint university-industry laboratories through the lens of proximity dimensions: Moving beyond geographical proximity. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 2020, 12, 433–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vesperi, W.; Gagnidze, I. Rethinking the university system: Toward the entrepreneurial university (the case of Italy). Kybernetes 2019, 50, 2021–2041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gojny-Zbierowska, M.; Zbierowski, P. Improvisation as Responsible Innovation in Organizations. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO. ISO 56003—Gestão da Inovação—Feramentas e Métodos de Parceria para a Inovação—Orientações (Innovation Management—Tools and Partnership Methods for Innovation—Guidelines); ISO: London, UK, 2021; p. 23. Available online: https://www.abntcatalogo.com.br/ (accessed on 4 April 2021).
- Stilgoe, J.; Owen, R.; Macnaghten, P. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Res. Policy 2013, 42, 1568–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Owen, R.; Macnaghten, P.; Stilgoe, J. Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Sci. Public Policy 2012, 39, 751–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- de Saille, S. Innovating innovation policy: The emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’. J. Responsible Innov. 2015, 2, 152–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Partnering Initiative and Undesa the SDG Partnership Guidebook: A Practical Guide to Building High_Impact Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships for the Sustainable Development Goals. Available online: https://www.thepartneringinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/SDG-Partnership-Guidebook-1.0.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2022).
- Caloghirou, Y.; Hondroyiannis, G.; Vonortas, N.S. The performance of research partnerships. Manag. Decis. Econ. 2003, 24, 85–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UN. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg4 (accessed on 2 May 2019).
- Oliveira-Duarte, L.; Reis, D.A.; Fleury, A.L.; Vasques, R.A.; Fonseca Filho, H.; Koria, M.; Baruque-Ramos, J. Innovation Ecosystem framework directed to Sustainable Development Goal #17 partnerships implementation. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 29, 1018–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schulz, A.J.; Israel, B.A.; Lantz, P. Instrument for evaluating dimensions of group dynamics within community-based participatory research partnerships. Eval. Program Plann. 2003, 26, 249–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, J.A.R.; Saint Onge, J.M.; Gurley-Calvez, T.; Anderson, R.; Mosley, J.; Brooks, J.V. Aligning research and practice: The role of academic-community partnerships for improving measurement and process. Eval. Program Plann. 2021, 89, 101990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ward, M.; Schulz, A.J.; Israel, B.A.; Rice, K.; Martenies, S.E.; Markarian, E. A conceptual framework for evaluating health equity promotion within community-based participatory research partnerships. Eval. Program Plann. 2018, 70, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hickey, S.; Couchman, K.; Stapleton, H.; Roe, Y.; Kildea, S. Experiences of health service providers establishing an Aboriginal-Mainstream partnership to improve maternity care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families in an urban setting. Eval. Program Plann. 2019, 77, 101705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fielden, S.J.; Rusch, M.L.; Masinda, M.T.; Sands, J.; Frankish, J.; Evoy, B. Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study. Eval. Program Plann. 2007, 30, 115–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stahl, B.C.; Akintoye, S.; Bitsch, L.; Bringedal, B.; Eke, D.; Farisco, M.; Grasenick, K.; Guerrero, M.; Knight, W.; Leach, T.; et al. From Responsible Research and Innovation to responsibility by design. J. Responsible Innov. 2021, 8, 175–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Limson, J. Putting responsible research and innovation into practice: A case study for biotechnology research, exploring impacts and RRI learning outcomes of public engagement for science students. Synthese 2021, 198, 4685–4710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrier, M. How to conceive of science for the benefit of society: Prospects of responsible research and innovation. Synthese 2021, 198, 4749–4768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giovanetti, M.; Alcantara, L.C.J.; Dorea, A.S.; Ferreira, Q.R.; de Almeida Marques, W.; Junior Franca de Barros, J.; Adelino, T.E.R.; Tosta, S.; Fritsch, H.; de Melo Iani, F.C.; et al. Promoting Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) During Brazilian Activities of Genomic and Epidemiological Surveillance of Arboviruses. Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 3743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hernández, M.O. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): La próxima frontera en I+D. Rev. Lasallista Investig. 2014, 11, 51–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- European Commission Options for strengthening Responsible Research and Innovation. Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1e6ada76-a9f7-48f0-aa86-4fb9b16dd10c (accessed on 2 April 2021).
- Era Learn Responsible Research & Innovation. Available online: https://www.era-learn.eu/support-for-partnerships/governance-administration-legal-base/responsible-research-innovation (accessed on 4 April 2021).
- Von Schomberg, R. Towards Responsible Research and Innovation in the Information and Communication Technologies and Security Technologies Fields. Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/60153e8a-0fe9-4911-a7f4-1b530967ef10#document-info (accessed on 6 April 2021).
- Gurzawska, A.; Mäkinen, M.; Brey, P. Implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Practices in Industry: Providing the Right Incentives. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scholten, V.E.; Blok, V. Foreword: Responsible innovation in the private sector. J. Chain Netw. Sci. 2015, 15, 101–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauer, A.; Bogner, A.; Fuchs, D. Rethinking societal engagement under the heading of Responsible Research and Innovation: (novel) requirements and challenges. J. Responsible Innov. 2021, 8, 342–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ex Post Facto Study. In Encyclopedia of Research Design; Salkind, N.J. (Ed.) SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Goodman-Scott, E.; McMahon, G.; Kalkbrenner, M.T.; Smith-Durkin, S.; Patel, S.; Czack, A.; Weeks, N. An Ex Post Facto Study Examining Implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Across School and Community Variables from an Inclusive Innovation Perspective. J. Posit. Behav. Interv. 2021, 109830072110137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bellini, C.; Pereira, R.; Becker, J. Emergent customer team performance and effectiveness: An ex-post-facto study of cognition and behavior in enterprise systems implementation. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2020, 47, 550–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez Aramendiz, V.R.; Gallardo Córdova, K.E. Decisiones en evaluación: Ambientes virtuales de posgrado, un estudio ex post-facto. Rev. Educ. Distancia 2019, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coral, J.; Lleixà, T.; Ventura, C. Foreign language competence and content and language integrated learning in multilingual schools in Catalonia: An ex post facto study analysing the results of state key competences testing. Int. J. Biling. Educ. Biling. 2018, 21, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macnaghten, P.; Chilvers, J. The Future of Science Governance: Publics, Policies, Practices. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 2014, 32, 530–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
# | Best Practices for Partnerships for Innovation |
---|---|
1 | Assess competence gaps in group members regarding technical knowledge for conducting the research. |
2 | Assess other competence gaps in group members, including skills for managing responsible research. |
3 | Discuss the best approach to fill in the competence gaps (internally or through partnerships). |
4 | Benchmark successful research partnerships with responsible innovation. |
5 | Adopt an open-minded approach before prematurely choosing closest partners or those from the network. |
6 | Consider previous experiences of potential partners regarding technical perspectives. |
7 | Consider previous experiences of potential partners regarding responsible research management. |
8 | Align the objectives of research partners to reach a common scope of understanding. |
9 | Analyse stakeholders’ requirements in advance, adjusting the scope of research partnerships, if appropriate. |
10 | Analyse the alignment of the scope established for research partnership with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. |
11 | Discuss with partners the aspects that can influence the achievement of research results and the Critical Success Factors for these results. |
12 | Correctly define confidentiality agreements and manners for disclosing generated results. |
13 | Create a structure to govern the interaction among partners, including knowledge dissemination and responsible research innovation best practices. |
14 | Conduct a continuous review on the understanding of members regarding partnership goals, members’ roles, and responsibilities assigned. |
15 | Periodically carry out a SWOT analysis to identify improvement opportunities associated with the research partnership established and to define action plans. |
16 | Implement a periodic process to measure and analyse the performance of the established research partnership. |
17 | Disseminate and debate lessons learned with partnership members for use in future research, including information on innovation and responsible research. |
# | Best Practices for Partnerships for Innovation (Source: See Table 1) | Results |
---|---|---|
1 | Assess competence gaps in group members regarding technical knowledge for conducting the research. | Best practice adopted |
2 | Assess other competence gaps in group members, including skills for managing responsible research. | Not always adopted |
3 | Discuss the best approach to fill in the competence gaps (internally or through partnerships). | Best practice adopted |
4 | Benchmark successful research partnerships with responsible innovation. | Not always adopted |
5 | Adopt an open-minded approach before prematurely choose closest partners or from the network. | Not always adopted |
6 | Consider previous experiences of potential partners regarding technical perspective. | Best practice adopted |
7 | Consider previous experiences of potential partners regarding responsible research management. | Not always adopted |
8 | Align the objectives of research partners to reach a common scope of understanding. | Best practice adopted |
9 | Analyse stakeholders’ requirements in advance, adjusting the scope of the research partnership, if appropriate. | Not always adopted |
10 | Analyse the alignment of the scope established for research partnership with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. | Not always adopted |
11 | Discuss with partners the aspects that can influence the achievement of research results and the Critical Success Factors for these results. | Not always adopted |
12 | Correctly define confidentiality agreements and manners for disclosing generated results. | Best practice adopted |
13 | Create a structure to govern the interaction among partners, including knowledge dissemination and responsible research innovation best practices. | Not always adopted |
14 | Conduct a continuous review on the understanding of members regarding partnership goals, members’ roles, and responsibilities assigned. | Not always adopted |
15 | Periodically carry out a SWOT analysis to identify improvements opportunities associated with the research partnership established and define action plans. | Not always adopted |
16 | Implement a periodic process to measure and analyse the performance of the established research partnership. | Not always adopted |
17 | Disseminate and debate lessons learned with partnership members for use in future research, including information on innovation and responsible research. | Not always adopted |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rampasso, I.S.; Bertazzoli, R.; Dibbern, T.; Serafim, M.P.; Leal Filho, W.; Rojas-Córdova, C.; Anholon, R. Evaluating Research Partnerships through ISO 56003 Guidelines, RRI Concepts, and Ex Post Facto Cases. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4186. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074186
Rampasso IS, Bertazzoli R, Dibbern T, Serafim MP, Leal Filho W, Rojas-Córdova C, Anholon R. Evaluating Research Partnerships through ISO 56003 Guidelines, RRI Concepts, and Ex Post Facto Cases. Sustainability. 2022; 14(7):4186. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074186
Chicago/Turabian StyleRampasso, Izabela Simon, Rodnei Bertazzoli, Thais Dibbern, Milena Pavan Serafim, Walter Leal Filho, Carolina Rojas-Córdova, and Rosley Anholon. 2022. "Evaluating Research Partnerships through ISO 56003 Guidelines, RRI Concepts, and Ex Post Facto Cases" Sustainability 14, no. 7: 4186. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074186