Abstract
Organisations in under-resourced areas that achieve long-term research sustainability by successfully competing for research funding will not only build their reputation for conducting quality science but also develop their human resources in a manner that reduces the risk of becoming a future security threat. Major challenges to these organisations include identifying and prioritising funding opportunities, securing and administering external grant awards and publishing both the outcomes of research and relevant surveillance data. Lack of a standardised evaluation technique to assess institutional research capabilities poses challenges for identifying and targeting specific, repeatable processes that lead to organisational improvements. Short- and long-term goals, which are challenged by research quality, funding and human resources, need to be established in order to achieve complex missions such as reducing global health security threats. Once baseline capabilities are established, a consistent evaluation technique provides an objective view to complement other steps that enhance capabilities. The capability maturity model, which is often used in business and technology sectors for establishing life cycle and planning sustainment, is a technique that enhances performance by defining three levels of capability (initial, managed and optimised). An organisation can assess its current state of capability (‘as is’) and develop an actionable strategy for its next progression (‘to be’). In addition, application of a CMM aids creation of a strategy for realising a more repeatable and optimised process. Research programmes frequently rely on basic metrics such as the number of peer-reviewed publications and grant funding awards to measure their quality. Our analysis suggests an approach that includes references and tools, especially those that are risk-based, which can be used to establish initial best practices, define metrics, measure outputs and rates of success in a stepwise manner. In addition, we provide a pilot example from a survey of research institutes in under-resourced areas.
Highlights
Organisations that achieve long-term research sustainment by successfully competing for research funding build their reputation for conducting quality science and develop their human resources in a manner that reduces the risk of becoming a future security threat
In assessing and evaluating research capabilities, especially those related to global health security programmes, methods must be used to focus on the success of securing and administering external grant funding by the institute
We hypothesise that an analysis of institutional research capabilities which combines an objective self-assessment with historic metrics, and applies Capability Maturity Model (CMM) benchmarks designed for business and industry, provides a positive direction for strategic institutional development
Summary
Organisations that achieve long-term research sustainment by successfully competing for research funding build their reputation for conducting quality science and develop their human resources in a manner that reduces the risk of becoming a future security threat. One mechanism for enhancing scientific skills, in conducting quality hypothesis-driven research and reporting in international peer-reviewed journals with good impact factors, is collaborating with other peer scientists at national and international institutes These collaborations with experienced, successful scientists will strengthen development and testing of hypotheses; sharing of equipment, supplies, reagents and assays (e.g. commercial and homemade); standard operating procedures; and improve writing skills for scientific presentations, reports and manuscripts. Successful research will lead to conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications, which will raise an institute’s profile and international recognition This procedure will enhance the subsequent application process for obtaining grant funding and collaboration from international institutions, resulting in an upward cycle of successes in improving research sustainability. Success will depend on those associated networks and partnerships that an organisation maintains. (Marjanovic, Hanlin, Diepeveen, & Chataway, 2012)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
