ERIC EJ902226: Customer-Supplier Roles and Relationships in the Management of Research Projects

2007·0.1 MB·English

by  ERIC

Customer-Supplier Roles and Relationships in the
Management of Research Projects
Dr. Ian M. Carter
Director of Research
Research and Business Services
University of Liverpool
Foresight Building
3 Brownlow Street
Liverpool
L69 3GL
UK
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
[email protected]
Author’s Note
This article derives its inspiration from a conversation between the author (when he was at
the University of Glasgow) and staff at the then UK Office of Science and Technology about
how Government approaches the commissioning of research. The matrix derived from that
conversation has subsequently been used to help understand and tease out quality and process
issues.
Abstract
Recognising the existence of customer-supplier roles and relationships in the performance
of research can lead to an improvement in the management, and hence delivery, of research.
Research, especially university-based research, is often managed with a light touch, with the
researchers operating independently, and neither their institution nor their funder intervening
to a great extent. Whilst this has significant advantages, the explicit understanding and
execution of specific roles will enhance the research performance for both those undertaking
research and those using its results. This paper presents a simple matrix to help explore the
customer-supplier relationship, and to identify some key activities of each during different
stages of the research process. Three stages are identified, relating to the commissioning
and winning of funding, undertaking the research, and reporting and using the results. Each
of these provides a focus for a set of roles, which might be the responsibility of different
individuals or organisations. The role of the research administrator in this model is also
explored, to show how it is an integral part.
Key Words: Research management, customer-supplier relationships
Introduction questions; recording and reporting the
Undertaking research involves a range results; and making use of the results
of activities: generating the idea for in both specific and broader contexts.
the research, refining it and identifying All of this involves a number of roles
the relevant hypotheses and questions; and responsibilities, including those of a
developing the method; generating the customer-supplier nature. In some cases,
necessary funding; undertaking the studies the customer-supplier relationship is clearer
to test the hypotheses and answer the (e.g. contract research) than in others (e.g.
The Journal of Research Administration Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 59
grant-funded and institutionally-funded to their customers, typically taken to be
research). In institutionally-funded research, their institutional academic community.
and in some types of externally grant-funded Even in this context, the recognition of the
work, the institution may be acting as both alternative customer bases of the institution
customer and supplier (e.g. where the idea and the external funder are important to
for the content of the research comes from recognise, in the knowledge that they
the researcher themselves). This paper require a different service from that of the
explores these roles with the aid of a simple academic researcher. A later section of this
matrix, and aims to show how performance paper discusses the role of the research
can be improved with only a little additional administrator in the customer-supplier
conscious effort. interaction.
A reflection on customer-supplier Whilst recognising the sensitivities that
relationships does not mean that one is might exist about the terminology, the
operating a commercial model, or that it terms customer and supplier are used in
reduces the effectiveness of the research this paper to reflect the roles of individuals
process, or academic freedom to investigate or organisations in being the recipients or
and express. Being well-organised, and providers of research, respectively, and not
understanding and responding to the in other, potentially more pejorative, ways.
person or organisation that is paying for the
The Customer-Supplier Research
research, can only have beneficial effects
in terms of making a case, winning funding Matrix
Table 1 presents a simple matrix of customer
and producing interesting results. Indeed, in
and supplier roles during a three stage
the vast majority of academic applications
research process. The stages represent the
for funding, those making the decisions
major phases of determining what research
are other academics. This does not reduce
is to be done and who is to do it, undertaking
the need to understand what those other
the research, and using the results. The
academics will be looking for, and what they
relevant tasks, processes, activities and
believe to be a good outcome.
decisions do not, of course, fall neatly into
There are a number of other issues about the six boxes, but the broad distinctions are
customer-supplier relationships, in terms sufficient to support the discussion of the
of the fundamental role of research support different roles undertaking the stages.
functions, and their provision of service
Table 1
The Customer-Supplier Research Matrix
Stage Customer Supplier
1 Commissioning Winning the Business
2 Monitoring Progress Doing the Research
3 Using the Results Reporting the Results
Stage 1 department might commission a piece
The commissioning of research will take of contract research to meet a specific
different forms, typically dependent on the need, relating to their strategic objectives.
type of funder. A company or government A Research Council or Federal research
60 Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 The Journal of Research Administration
funder1, on the other hand, may make a objectives. Submitting a standard grant
call for proposals in a broad area, with less proposal to a call for tenders3 is not likely to
prescription of what should be delivered, be successful. In some cases, suppliers will
or may have an open call for “responsive have to be on an agreed/accredited list of
mode” applications in their subject area2. suppliers.
In between these two is investigator-led
An extension of contract research is service
contract research, in which the researcher
provision: the use of existing knowledge
provides the hypothesis. The activity of
commissioning is therefore different. to the benefit of the customer, for payment,
without the generation of new knowledge
Contract Research (i.e., the activity does not meet the Frascati
Funders at the contractual end of the definition of research (HEFCE, 1995)). In
spectrum would tend to determine the this type of activity, a standard purchaser
hypothesis and research question that they – supplier relationship is more likely to
wish to have answered, and in trying to apply, whereas research relationships will
win the business, the supplier will try to tend to have more dialogue and iterative
show that they have the capability, capacity participation between the parties.
and track record to do so, as well as
Grant Research
demonstrating value for money. A variation
A large proportion (and in some universities
on this may be that the customer will
the vast majority) of research is closer
define the issue to be addressed, with the
to the grant-funded end of the spectrum,
expectation that the supplier will be able to
in which the details of the hypothesis,
define the research hypothesis. The nature
questions, method, etc. are determined by
of contract research varies, but it is often
the academic researcher, to be evaluated by
focused on problem-solving, rather than
the funder on the quality of the research. In
blue skies knowledge generation, and hence
this case, the commissioner of the research,
the commissioning process may be more
and hence one of the customers, is the
constrained.
researcher him- or herself, along with the
Suppliers will be best placed to respond, institution. Many, if not most, institutions
and hence to aid the customer’s business, if require grant applications to be approved
they have an understanding of the needs of by a researcher’s head of department and/or
the customer, including the uses to which Dean, plus institutional authority. Doing so
the research results will be put, so that they is a form of commissioning process: “Yes,
can demonstrate a good match with and this project fits with the institutional/faculty/
understanding of the customer’s underlying departmental strategy.” This is becoming
a more conscious process than it has in the
1 The author is writing from a UK perspective, in which past, although it is unlikely that the Head
the Research Councils are the UK Government’s research of Department and the Dean, let alone the
agencies, akin to the US National Science Foundation and
researcher, is thinking of themselves as a
National Institutes of Health, whilst individual Government
departments commission specific research either directly “customer.” Perhaps they should. This is
or through a tendering process. References to Federal already relatively common in the context
throughout the paper therefore relate to U.S. Federal
of the resources required for the projects,
agencies.
2 Responsive Mode refers to a mechanism used by a funder 3 A Call for Tenders is the formal contractual process used
in which proposals may be submitted at any time, or against to elicit offers against a specification of work, and is used for
specified deadlines, within a general area of interest, as a significant proportion of Government department-funded
opposed to Managed or Directed Mode, in which the funder research
defines more precisely the required research topics.
The Journal of Research Administration Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 61
where the department head or Dean is being In terms of winning the business, the grant
asked to confirm that there is space available, process requires the supplier to understand
technical support, and so on. It is starting the customer’s needs, too. It will often be
to become more explicit, as more countries the case that certain areas or techniques are
move to or consider a full economic cost favoured or even in fashion. Understanding
basis for their research (HEFCE, 2005). A what has been funded recently can help.
consequence is that the researcher needs to Equally, being in a position to influence
show more explicitly why the research is (appropriately!) the interests, policies,
worth supporting. Although this makes sound objectives, and targets of the funder can be
management sense, there will be arguments beneficial. This takes multiple streams of
that this sort of approach is a restriction of activity, including institutional interactions
academic freedom. Understanding that there with the funder at senior levels, involvement
is a form of customer-supplier relationship of researchers on the funder’s committees,
within the institution (as well as what is and interactions of the individual researcher
the true, legal nature of academic freedom with the funder’s staff, to talk through
(SURPC, 1997)) can help us to work through specific proposals. Those researchers who are
these issues. more actively involved in the wider research
community (e.g., reviewing proposals and
This shift of focus of the responsibility
publications, being members of decision-
for defining the research is interesting and making committees) tend to have better
important. It underlies the nature of academic
success rates because they understand their
freedom – to be able to ask questions – and
subject and its funding environment; i.e.,
is relevant to the increased emphasis on
they understand their customer (which
universities undertaking more research with
particularly includes their peer community)
industry, on a contractual basis; i.e. is it as
(Viner, Powell, & Green, 2004).
reasonable in a research contract to modify
the hypothesis as the work progresses The role of the university’s research
as it might be in a research grant? The support office (or equivalent) will also vary,
relationship between customer and supplier depending upon the customer, and also on
in terms of the work to be done is much more the researcher(s) involved. A support office
tightly bound in a research contract situation should be researching the market needs,
than in a research grant. Although this could whether that is Government or Federal
be considered as an issue for Stage 2, it funders’ objective areas, or the commercial
merits attention at this stage, as the freedom market for research outputs or products. Both
for manoeuvre will be determined by the markets, but particularly the commercial
agreement reached during Stage 1. market, require the ability to understand the
institution’s own expertise and capability,
Some customers may be happy for
and how to package the range of options to
divergence from the original goals to occur.
best effect.
However, they are likely to want to know,
and to be part of the decisions to allow Stage 2
redirection and replanning. Understanding Having won the research grant or contract
and enabling this partnership is important, funding, the researcher then needs to get on
and the means of doing so need to be and do the research. In a significant number
addressed at the start, rather than half-way of contexts, this is all that happens in this
through, when the need arises. stage: the customer (internal or external) may
have little contact and no involvement in the
62 Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 The Journal of Research Administration
progress of the research. This may or may not may enable the customer to make use of key
be reasonable, depending on the scope and results without having to wait until the formal
timescale of the project. Longer-term grants completion of the work and its final report.
will often require annual or intermediate This can also apply where the researcher
progress reports, and some may involve a is the customer, and may take the form of
mid-stage review, to confirm continuance. patenting and/or publishing results during the
Contracts will often require regular reporting course of the work. Thus, in both these cases,
or monitoring, which can come as a bit of a elements of Stage 3 are taking place whilst
shock to a researcher more used to grant or the research is on-going during Stage 2.
Federal funding.
Stage 3
There are particular challenges at this stage. Once the research is complete, the researcher
From the supplier’s/researcher’s position, will have to report the results. This may be
maintaining contact with the customer a formality, or the payment for the work
and making regular reports can be highly may rest on the quality and suitability of
valuable. Not only does it help to meet any the report or other research product. In the
specific reporting requirements, it can also institutional context, we might consider how
help to give the customer confidence in much attention we pay to this, to ensure
the researcher, hence possibly allow some that all possible outputs are identified. For
flexibility in the current work, as well as example, do we ensure final reports are of a
strengthening the researcher’s position for suitable quality, make explicit links between
extension or follow-on work. If this sounds outputs and the work that produced them,
as though it’s only relevant to contractual and maximise publicity for the findings?
situations, consider for a moment the position The customer, having received the results,
of a researcher running a Research Council should ensure that they answer the original
or Federally-funded project. The funder will questions, and act accordingly – depending
be keen to hear of successful progress, so that on what their objectives were for the
they can use that information in their own research. However, they should also look for
processes of seeking and allocating funds tangential or secondary uses for the results:
between programmes, and in demonstrating for example, could they be used by someone
beneficial research outputs and outcomes to else in the organisation. This is especially
their own paymasters. Equally, the researcher relevant to grant-funded research in which
providing progress reports to his or her one of the customers is the researcher’s
department/faculty will help to disseminate own institution: as well as other researchers
the research results, and help to demonstrate potentially using the results, they should
their competence up their management line. inform or feed directly into the institution’s
research-based teaching. Results may be
For the customer, active engagement with the
used, directly or in modified form, to count
research can help to ensure that the desired
for the knowledge transfer metrics against
objectives are met, and importantly that the
which many of us are now measured.4
subsequent transfer of the results to their
Similarly, whilst the results (hopefully)
target is achieved more successfully. The
customer will need to be careful to balance 4 The UK uses metrics of knowledge transfer activity
their involvement and need for reports, to to demonstrate levels of activity and by implication
be sure that such activities do not become the socio-economic effects. Some of these metrics are
detrimental to the research itself or be used directly in allocation of core Government funding
to universities to support knowledge transfer: e.g. the
perceived to bias or influence the outcomes.
Higher Education Innovation Fund in England, and the
However, maintaining a suitable oversight
Knowledge Transfer Grant in Scotland.
The Journal of Research Administration Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 63
answer the original questions, they may lead to the customer missing a critical
prompt additional issues to explore, or the opportunity for their research to be done,
methodology used might be applicable to with competitive / market implications. For
another problem area. This discussion is also an institution, being aware of the range of
relevant to Government-funded research: the research being undertaken for a specific
findings in one Department’s research may customer is necessary so that issues (such
be usable by another Department, which will as slippage) can be headed off before they
require transparency of the activities and become crises, and new opportunities are
good communication links, for example via identified and pursued (especially those in
the departmental Chief Scientific Advisors.5 which several different researchers/groups
are needed).
All of these comments apply equally
where the institution or the researcher is The original matrix can be expanded, as in
the customer: Where does this lead next? Table 2, to include a number of activities
Can the methodology be extended? Can it that can be associated with each role and
be applied elsewhere (e.g. on a different stage. As already observed, the appropriate
topic, or the same topic for a different agent to fulfil each role might vary between
customer)? Should this area of research still projects. Thus an organisation or individual
be a focus? Answering these questions will needs to understand when it or they
be part of the process of commissioning should fulfil a particular role, and hence is
the next piece of research, and may happen responsible for certain activities. The actions
explicitly or implicitly. Within a university, within the roles might vary depending
aside from further research, the results on whether it is an internal or external
could be relevant for development into an customer. This can cause issues within an
exploitable technique or product, or creation institution, such as a researcher negotiating
of a Continuing Professional Development contractual details rather than an authorised
course, as well as becoming incorporated institutional official, or an administrator
into mainstream learning and teaching. pursuing a commercialisation route that does
not fit with the researcher’s plans for the
Expanding the Matrix work.
This description of the research process,
and the perspectives of both customer and The Role of Research Administrators
supplier, necessarily suggests a linearity in Customer-Supplier Relationships
that does not generally exist. Stages 1, 2 The discussion so far has tended to
and 3 overlap, and blur into each other, concentrate on the academic researchers
both for the single piece of research, and and their role in these relationships,
between different pieces of research. This and particularly noting that they might
makes understanding the roles even more be their own customer. A couple of
important: not providing reports to the observations have been made about research
customer might lead to the supplier missing administrative support staff, and it is worth
a second piece of work that the customer some more thought on this area.
intends to commission; not being aware
Aside from the support role, in helping
of the supplier’s capacity constraints may
researchers to apply for, win, and operate
5 Many UK Government Departments have a Chief research and related activities, in which the
Scientific Advisor; they interact under the auspices of administrator is providing a service to the
the Government’s Chief Scientific Advisor, who is the researchers, support staff are also crucial
head of the Office of Government Science.
64 Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 The Journal of Research Administration
Table 2
The Expanded Customer-Supplier Research Matrix
Stage Customer Supplier
1 Commissioning Winning the Business
• Define objectives, targets, and real • Understand customer and their objectives.
needs of the research. • Interact formally and informally at all levels
• Understand suppliers (capability and with customer to understand and influence.
capacity). • Know own (individual, group, institution)
capabilities and capacity.
• Understand the brief; pre-qualify.
• Apply/tender/propose work to meet
objectives.
2 Monitoring Progress Doing the Research
• Keep watching brief. • Report regularly, to self, internally and to
• Provide assistance where appropriate. external customers.
• Look for further opportunities. • Check customer is happy with progress.
• Identify protectable IP
• Look for “spin-off”, other opportunities.
3 Using the Results Reporting the Results
• Read the final report! • Produce final report – ensure it meets the
• Use the results, against original customer’s objectives.
objectives. • Follow up to check it is OK, enquire about
• Look for other uses of results. or suggest follow-on.
• Consider follow-on research/other • Publish the results (if permitted)
research.
• Exploit the results.
to the wider customer-supplier relationship We are now seeing more opportunities
that is being discussed in this paper. The for key account relationships, in which
administrator, whether centrally or locally- a range of research and related activities
based, can have a role in understanding the are provided for a customer (typically a
external opportunities and market for their larger organisation, but can be both public
researchers’ skills, might be responsible for and private sector); e.g. research projects,
elements of market analysis and promotion, studentships, placements, consultancy,
and may be significantly involved in secondments, and training. Managing the
preparing the proposal for funding. All relationship across these activities becomes
of these need attention to the customer necessary, with a level of complexity in
requirements of the research. In some most universities because they are supported
cases, the administrator will have a more by different parts of the administration (as
established relationship with the funder than well as probably being delivered by different
the researcher does, which can be used to parts of the academic structure, to reflect
good effect. Equally, the administrator may the skills and subject mix). The role of the
understand the institution’s own workings research administrator can then be to help to
better, and hence enable their researchers to form internal consortia, construct packages
have their proposals approved and enhance of products, and act as the bridge to the
their internal profile. customer.
The Journal of Research Administration Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 65
This change in approach may appear and organisations are already doing this.
antagonistic to some researchers, and However, many of us may not be, and hence
hence the administrator will also need to have opportunity for improvement. That
provide reassurance, for example about the begins by asking a critical question: Do you
researcher’s freedom to undertake research. really know your customers and suppliers?
Research administrators can thus take
active roles within the customer-supplier References
relationship, as well as supporting their HEFCE (1995). Generic research: Method
and data collection. Circular Letter
researchers in fulfilling their roles.
10/95, Annex B. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/
Conclusions pubs/hefce/1995/c10_95.htm
The customer-supplier relationship is HEFCE (2005). Transparent approach to
simple, but is also very accessible, and costing. http://www.jcpsg/guidance/
helps us to understand the roles in the about.htm
commissioning and delivery of research, HM Treasury (2004). 10-year science and
roles that may not have been particularly innovation framework. http://www.
well explored in the past. In the context of hm-treasury.gov.uk./spending_review/
governmental pressures for universities to spend_sr04/associated_documents/
assume responsibility for contributing a spending_sr04_science.cfm
greater, even significant, part in the future SURPC (1997). Academic freedom and
economy (HM Treasury, 2004), there will research. In Scottish Universities
be more need for the explicit management Research Policy Consortium University
of customer-supplier relationships. This research in Scotland: Developing a
will be best achieved where there is a policy framework. (pp. 91-98).
balance between the researcher’s freedom to Viner, N., Powell, P., & Green, R. (2004).
explore an issue or hypothesis and sufficient Institutionalised biases in the award of
communication to ensure that the customer research grants: A preliminary analysis
can be reassured about progress and revisiting the principle of accumulative
outcomes. Customer-supplier relationships advantage. Research Policy, 33,
may currently be most often considered 443-454.
in the context of a contractual relationship
with an external organisation, and hence
possibly are already being managed
appropriately. The benefits for a research
organisation may therefore be in considering
the internal customer-supplier interactions,
and those involved in grant-funded research
work. Much of what has been presented
is intuitive; however, a more conscious
approach could bring benefits to the
individual researcher and to their institution.
Those who perform best will fulfil their
own responsibilities, but will also be aware
of others’ responsibilities and support
them where appropriate. Some individuals
66 Volume XXXVIII, Number 2, 2007 The Journal of Research Administration