David Schmidt1, Jill Reyment2, Sue Kirby3, Emma L Webster4, David Lyle5. 1. The University of Sydney, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia dsch5166@uni.sydney.edu.au. 2. Clinical Governance, Murrumbidgee Local Health District, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia jill.reyment@health.nsw.gov.au. 3. Centre for Remote Health Research, Department of Rural Health, Broken Hill University, Broken Hill, NSW 2880, Australia s.kirby@unswalumni.com. 4. School of Rural Health, Sydney Medical School, The University Of Sydney, Dubbo, NSW 2830, Australia emma.webster@sydney.edu.au. 5. University Department of Rural Health (Broken Hill), Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Broken Hill, NSW 2880, Australia david.lyle@health.nsw.gov.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Research training is conducted within rural health organisations without a clear understanding of the role of research within the structure of the organisation itself, potentially limiting the effectiveness of that training. This study sought to identify the role of research within the organisational structure of a large rural health organisation in Australia. Specifically, the study sought the answer to the following questions: Is research identified within the strategic documents of the organisation? If so at what level of the organisation is responsibility for research attributed? Is research identified within the position descriptions of staff? If so, at what level of the organisation are staff expected to conduct research? Is there evidence of research activity elsewhere within the organisational structure? METHODS: This qualitative study used a critical realist approach and content analysis to identify and contextualise the terms 'research' and 'evaluation' within publicly available and internal documents from a large rural health organisation in New South Wales, Australia. Secondary thematic analysis identified organisational factors influencing research activity. Data were sourced from strategic, operational and other documents from the 2015 calendar year, with key documents extracted from 1654 external and internal websites, 159 position descriptions and approvals for research projects active in 2015 (n=53). RESULTS: Only a third of research conducted in the organisation was locally instigated or involved local staff as researchers. Matching between positional responsibility for research and research activity was limited. Research was a strategic goal for the organisation; however, this was not well represented in operational documents. A lack of research in operational documents devolves responsibility for research to individuals. Individuals with greater levels of individual agency were more likely to be engaged in research. A low critical mass of local researchers means that collaboration, both internal and external, is essential to strengthen research capacity. CONCLUSION: Health services can create conditions for local health research in a rural environment by addressing structural barriers such as a lack of operational planning for research. Identifying research-active individuals as champions to build internal research collaboration is an important strategy, as is partnering with external organisations for necessary expertise.
INTRODUCTION: Research training is conducted within rural health organisations without a clear understanding of the role of research within the structure of the organisation itself, potentially limiting the effectiveness of that training. This study sought to identify the role of research within the organisational structure of a large rural health organisation in Australia. Specifically, the study sought the answer to the following questions: Is research identified within the strategic documents of the organisation? If so at what level of the organisation is responsibility for research attributed? Is research identified within the position descriptions of staff? If so, at what level of the organisation are staff expected to conduct research? Is there evidence of research activity elsewhere within the organisational structure? METHODS: This qualitative study used a critical realist approach and content analysis to identify and contextualise the terms 'research' and 'evaluation' within publicly available and internal documents from a large rural health organisation in New South Wales, Australia. Secondary thematic analysis identified organisational factors influencing research activity. Data were sourced from strategic, operational and other documents from the 2015 calendar year, with key documents extracted from 1654 external and internal websites, 159 position descriptions and approvals for research projects active in 2015 (n=53). RESULTS: Only a third of research conducted in the organisation was locally instigated or involved local staff as researchers. Matching between positional responsibility for research and research activity was limited. Research was a strategic goal for the organisation; however, this was not well represented in operational documents. A lack of research in operational documents devolves responsibility for research to individuals. Individuals with greater levels of individual agency were more likely to be engaged in research. A low critical mass of local researchers means that collaboration, both internal and external, is essential to strengthen research capacity. CONCLUSION: Health services can create conditions for local health research in a rural environment by addressing structural barriers such as a lack of operational planning for research. Identifying research-active individuals as champions to build internal research collaboration is an important strategy, as is partnering with external organisations for necessary expertise.
Keywords:
research capacity development; rural research; strategic planning; Australia
Authors: Anna Wong Shee; Claire Quilliam; Denise Corboy; Kristen Glenister; Carol McKinstry; Alison Beauchamp; Laura Alston; Darryl Maybery; Drew Aras; Kevin Mc Namara Journal: Aust J Rural Health Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 2.060