Valuing knowledge transfer : a new approach to assessing the broader impact of higher education institutions

There is considerable policy interest in exploring the overall value of higher education to society and in how higher education can support wider economic growth and development through 'knowledge transfer' from higher education institutions. Until fairly recently consideration of 'knowledge transfer' activity has tended to be mainly focussed on those HEI outputs that are commercial or market-based, relate to interaction with businesses and which are also relatively easy to measure (licensing, patents, consultancy contracts and so on). However it is beginning to be recognised that non-market outputs of higher education institutions (such as community interactions) could also have significant economic and social value linked to their support of knowledge flow to the wider community. This paper presents a new perspective on knowledge transfer from institutions. It demonstrates the application of welfare economic principles to estimate the value of non-market outputs of higher education institutions and It presents the results of a pilot study of 3 areas of non-market activity of Scottish higher education institutions, namely community engagement, cultural outreach and public policy advisory activity

Measuring the volume and value of the outputs of higher education institutions

One of the key issues facing the Scottish Government and Scottish Funding Council is how to assess the contribution made to Scotland's economy by Scotland's higher education sector. Higher Education's contribution to the economy and society at large is viewed as providing one of the most important justifications for government expenditure on higher education. However there is a paucity of robust quantitative evidence against which related resource allocation decisions aimed at encouraging economically valuable activity can be made. Taking higher education activity as a whole there has been no practical, valid, way to analyse the economic value of what universities do, or to compare the value thus created with that generated by other activities in the economy. The overall objective of this paper is to show how the development of a framework with comprehensive and detailed quantitative measures of the outputs of HEIs in both volume and value terms can enable a holistic analysis of higher education institutions' economic value. The present paper draws on initial case study research supported by the Nuffield Foundation which was further elaborated in two substantive reports to the Scottish Funding Council

Organizational cognitive neuroscience – potential (non-) implications for practice

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to highlight the potential implications and non-implications for leadership and organization development of a recent systematic review of empirical developments in organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN). Design/methodology/approach: Butler et al.’s (2016) systematic review of 40 empirical articles related to OCN is re-interpreted in terms of its potential to reveal (non-) implications for practice. OCN is critically discussed, then related to the research findings from studies with two methodological designs. Findings: At this stage of OCN’s emergence, it appears that neuroimaging and physiology-based research methods have equal potential in their implications for practice, though hormonal data poses ethical public interest dilemmas. Both methods cannot be reduced to specific forms of application to practice, but they set an aspirational direction for the future development of leadership and organizations. Practical implications: There appear to be two paces of translational activity – practitioners are moving more quickly than academics in applying OCN to practice. It is suggested that a meeting of minds may be needed to ensure that any risks associated with applying OCN to practice are minimized or eliminated. Social implications: Inter-disciplinary research, like OCN, requires a social consensus about how basic research in cognitive neuroscience can be applied to organizations. A think tank will provide opportunities for deeper engagement and co-production between academics and practitioners. Originality/value: Critically exploring the potential implications of OCN for practice, by basing the discussion on a systematic review of empirical developments

What's in a Name? The Politics of ‘Precision Medicine’

The authors acknowledge the support of the Wellcome Trust in funding the Seed Award “Patienthood and Participation in the Digital Era” (grant 201652/Z/16/Z); research on this project contributed to the writing of this article. The authors would also like to acknowledge the stimulus of the H2020 SysmedIBD project (contract no 305564) in developing ideas that contributed to this work.Peer reviewe

Sociology of low expectations: Recalibration as innovation work in biomedicine

"This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/openaccess.htm). "Social scientists have drawn attention to the role of hype and optimistic visions of the future in providing momentum to biomedical innovation projects by encouraging innovation alliances. In this article, we show how less optimistic, uncertain, and modest visions of the future can also provide innovation projects with momentum. Scholars have highlighted the need for clinicians to carefully manage the expectations of their prospective patients. Using the example of a pioneering clinical team providing deep brain stimulation to children and young people with movement disorders, we show how clinicians confront this requirement by drawing on their professional knowledge and clinical expertise to construct visions of the future with their prospective patients; visions which are personalized, modest, and tainted with uncertainty. We refer to this vision-constructing work as recalibration, and we argue that recalibration enables clinicians to manage the tension between the highly optimistic and hyped visions of the future that surround novel biomedical interventions, and the exigencies of delivering those interventions in a clinical setting. Drawing on work from science and technology studies, we suggest that recalibration enrolls patients in an innovation alliance by creating a shared understanding of how the “effectiveness” of an innovation shall be judged.This project was funded by the Wellcome Trust (Wellcome Trust Biomedical Strategic Award 086034)

Biosamples as gifts? How participants in biobanking projects talk about donation.

Funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre based at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust University of Oxford Oxford Biomedical Research Centre FellowshipPeer reviewedPublisher PD

It's money that matters: the financial context of ethical decision-making in modern biomedicine

While the importance of patient autonomy is widely acknowledged and discussed in the bioethics literature, clinicians' autonomy, their ability to make the best choices about patients' care free from outside interference, is far less debated. This paper takes one form of external influence over clinical decisions - the cost of drugs - and applies it to a specific case, that of HER2 positive breast cancer and the use of the drug Herceptin in the UK. Drawing on interviews with clinicians, researchers and policymakers, I explore the way financial decisions about Herceptin shape clinicians' autonomy, and how clinicians as individuals and as professional groups respond to these limits and seek to provide treatment to the highest number of the most deserving patients they can. The point of this paper is not to castigate bioethicists for misguidedly focusing on patient autonomy but point out that clinicians' autonomy may be so circumscribed by external factors that it may make no sense to speak of their actions as stemming from ethical decisions. At the same time, I suggest that financial constraints create areas at the margin of clinical practice which are deserving of bioethical consideration