• Link to X
  • Link to Mail
Tel: +44 20 7229 2729
Bayswater Institute
  • Home
  • About
    • Priya Davda
    • Ken Eason
    • William Maton-Howarth
    • Alexander Hebden
    • Harini Sivaji
    • Simon Bell
    • Corinna Arndt
    • Paul Tucker
    • Aki Ho
    • Gillian Gregory
    • Sara Bhandari
    • Trustees
    • Lisl Klein
    • Harold Bridger
    • Privacy Policy
  • Research & Evaluation
  • Professional Development
    • Wisdom in Groups
    • Workshops
    • Masterclasses
    • Professional Coaching
  • Partners
  • Case Studies
  • News
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

We need to separate the research from the policy making

in All Articles, Methods, News/by FiDeeEdit1

The Government process for dealing with the Covid-19 crisis has revealed many of the issues at the heart of creating an effective action research strategy. The Government is responsible for policy making and they have SAGE (the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) to provide scientific and technical advice.  SAGE assesses the data on the progress of the virus, models the impact of possible actions and collates all the relevant information. The Government says it ‘follows the science’ but that is not the same as ‘we do what the scientists say’. Scientists advise but ministers decide: weighing up the trade-offs between the health risks and the economic consequences of different ways of coming out of lockdown is a burden politicians must bear.

The structure we have at Government level mirrors the separation between the research phase and the action phase in action research. This is a necessary separation so we get evidence that is as objective as possible.

Any organisation seeking to use an action research strategy to find their way out of lockdown will need to separate the responsibilities for planning and action (the policy making) from the responsibilities for research (the gathering and processing of the evidence). In a large organisation this separation of function may be relatively straightforward: the senior management may determine the action steps and staff from functions such as information analysis, business analysis, Human Resources and Health and Safety may undertake the research. It is also possible that a separate organisation, such as ourselves, takes responsibility for the research and evaluation functions in the action research cycle.

But in a small organisation there may be no pre-existing separations of role to make use of. If this is the case it can be useful to give somebody a specific responsibility for gathering the evidence to underpin the debate about the next action steps.

How well this separation will work in practice will depend upon the level of trust between members of the organisation and the degree of openness that people display to the evidence that is gathered. This is a topic we will attend to in the next post.

Professor Ken Eason

Tags: Action Research, Covid-19
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail
https://www.bayswaterinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/header-logo-white-blend-deeper-top.png 0 0 FiDeeEdit1 https://www.bayswaterinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/header-logo-white-blend-deeper-top.png FiDeeEdit12020-08-03 12:40:132020-08-03 12:40:56We need to separate the research from the policy making
You might also like
Image of a person with their hands up in the air, reflecting the title of "don't shoot" in relation to action research ‘Don’t shoot the messenger’.  Can we face reality?
Image of a person with their hands up in the air, reflecting the title of "don't shoot" in relation to action research Covid-19: How will we know how well we are doing?
Image of a person with their hands up in the air, reflecting the title of "don't shoot" in relation to action research Top-down or bottom-up: who makes the decisions in a pandemic?
Image of a person with their hands up in the air, reflecting the title of "don't shoot" in relation to action research Coming out of lockdown we are all action researchers now
Image of a person with their hands up in the air, reflecting the title of "don't shoot" in relation to action research Digital Change in Health and Social Care
Image of a person with their hands up in the air, reflecting the title of "don't shoot" in relation to action research Transforming care and health through information and technology: Local Investment Programme – Interim Report
Search Search

Categories

  • All Articles (72)
  • Case Studies (9)
  • Homeworking (7)
  • Methods (19)
  • Mindful Stories (33)
  • News (73)
  • Publications (63)
  • Resources (3)
  • Wisdom in Groups Blog (5)
  • Workshops (3)

Recent Posts

  • Calling All Digital App Developers in Health and Social Care. Can an Online Clinic give you a head start with two critical issues?
  • Pathways to Market for Tech Companies Seeking R&D Funding
  • WORKTECC: Workforce Operations that Realise Knowledge-based Transformational Efficiency gains in Community Care
  • Evaluating the West London Primary Care Navigator Scheme
  • Project Evaluations in the Local Government Association (LGA) Social Care Digital Innovation Programme (SCDIP)

Archives

  • November 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017

Themes

Action Research Automation Climate Change Covid-19 Double Task Electronic Journals Electronic Patient Records Embedding Technology in Practice Ergonomics Evaluation Fear Formations of Terror Group Dynamics Human Factors Imagine Imagine Method Information and Communication Technology ICT Information Systems Information Technology Integration Mindful Stories National Programme for Information Technology NHS NPfIT Organisational Change Organisational Development Policy Problem Structuring Method Project Fear Comic Realistic Evaluation Rich Pictures Social Value / Impact Sociotechnical Systems Sociotechnical Systems Theory Soft Systems Methodology Stakeholder Participation Sustainability Sustainable Development Telecare Telehealth Telemedicine Triple Task Weaponised Fear Wisdom in Groups Work
© Copyright – Bayswater Institute 2017 | Website Design – dwmultimedia.co.uk
  • Link to X
  • Link to Mail
Link to: Just published: A New Approach to Mindfulness: Mindful Stories – MiSt Link to: Just published: A New Approach to Mindfulness: Mindful Stories – MiSt Just published: A New Approach to Mindfulness: Mindful Stories – MiSt"MiSt" book cover Link to: Covid-19: How will we know how well we are doing? Link to: Covid-19: How will we know how well we are doing? Covid-19: How will we know how well we are doing?
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top