Collaboration with the outside world should also be rewarded
How do we reward researchers who spend so much of their time interacting with society around us? We now have the opportunity to discuss this question and eventually consider it when assessing which activities to recognise.
"From the Dean’s Desk" – a column in Inside Health
Shortly after a meeting in the Academic Council at which we talked about involvement, I received an email from one of the members of the council. She had thought about our discussions and suggested that I write directly to employees at Health in the faculty's newsletter. She suggested that I could write about some of the initiatives currently on my desk, so that all employees can keep abreast of some of the things we’re working on at the faculty.
I think it's a brilliant idea - thank you! I intend to continue this column once a month from now on.
There are many demands being placed on university employees these days. First and foremost, we are expected to conduct research and educate others. However, we are also expected to collaborate with surrounding society; develop, invent, and communicate popular science; participate in debates; and collaborate with public and private companies.
It's a reasonable expectation, one that many researchers are already dedicating their time and efforts to. We just haven't had a transparent and structured way of assessing these activities. However, by using Universities Denmark's framework, which encourages the recognition of competencies and experience within knowledge exchange, we now have the opportunity to work towards that. We should be able to recognise a researcher’s collaboration with the outside world - broadly understood as the activities that contribute to the conversion and dissemination of research results for the benefit of the welfare and development of society as a whole. For our faculty, this means our overall goal is to improve health for all.
I am pleased that we - with the support of Universities Denmark - can initiate a discussion on how we assess and reward the important and socially beneficial activities that go beyond education and research – but which build on the research we conduct at the faculty.
It's also worth noting that in the EU Horizon Europe programme, impact is a key criterion for receiving funding. It is therefore essential that we become better at documenting and acknowledging the derived effects of research as an integral part of our professional work.
If we succeed, we can make our research even more relevant while also strengthening our position in the European research landscape.
I very much look forward to discussing recognition in this broader perspective at the faculty during 2025. It won't be easy, but it is important.
The first and most important question is: What activities should be recognised and how can we assess those activities in a transparent and structured way? I will initially take this question to the Academic Council, which will also be a key player in our future efforts. So keep an eye on who is representing you and your department on the council, so that we can have a common discussion from start to finish.