A proposed framework and tool for non-economic research impact measurement

Research impact features heavily in debates about the measured university' and is now formally assessed by governments in the UK and Australia. Yet clear guidance on how impact can be measured in non-monetary ways is often lacking because of confused thinking and the context-specific nature of outcomes. To help resolve this, we first propose a general impact model of inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes framework. Then, using a survey approach of research users, we measure outcomes at different levels of abstraction using usefulness as the central construct and impact categories from the European (EU) and Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). The survey measures are simple, comparable between different impact cases, cost-effective, externally verifiable, and easily administered by those for whom impact measurement is new and puzzling. They can also be combined to form an impact index to address criticism that there is little standardisation in impact measurement. To improve the standardisation of context-specific measures, we suggest a common methodology for deriving these (SROI). The article discusses limitations of using surveys including administration, self-report data, and impact timescale problems, and suggests ways to reduce these. Implications for researchers, research managers, and assessors interested in measuring impact, such as who should do it and pay for it, are discussed.