A use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D: Illustrations from polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) research

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Evaluating federally funded research and development (R&D) presents unique challenges to both federal science agencies and evaluators. Often focusing only on outcome evaluative measures (such as productivity or economic value) can shortchange the true value of the federal investment. For example, program directors at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) talk about the "value added" of the new interdisciplinary science centers that they have funded-and they hope to be able to capture how funding can generate increased capacity for new cutting-edge research in the future. The purpose of this paper is to present a use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D, which explicitly focuses on measuring capacity-based metrics for evaluation instead of outcome-based metrics. The theory for the model presented here explicitly uses the concept of a Knowledge Value Collective that was introduced by Bozeman and Rogers [Bozeman, B., & Rogers, J. D. (2002). A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy, 31(5), 769-794; Rogers, J. D., & Bozeman, B. (2001). "Knowledge value alliances": An alternative to the R&D project focus in evaluation. Science Technology & Human Values, 26(1), 23-55].

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)21-35
Number of pages15
JournalEvaluation and Program Planning
Volume30
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2007

Fingerprint

Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
Research
Values
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Internet
science
Economics
Research Personnel
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
research and development
Technology
economic value
research policy
evaluation
value added
productivity
public
Transformation model
director
funding

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Strategy and Management
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Education
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{5cabcb0693554c9fae5cec05fce05c84,
title = "A use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D: Illustrations from polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) research",
abstract = "Evaluating federally funded research and development (R&D) presents unique challenges to both federal science agencies and evaluators. Often focusing only on outcome evaluative measures (such as productivity or economic value) can shortchange the true value of the federal investment. For example, program directors at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) talk about the {"}value added{"} of the new interdisciplinary science centers that they have funded-and they hope to be able to capture how funding can generate increased capacity for new cutting-edge research in the future. The purpose of this paper is to present a use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D, which explicitly focuses on measuring capacity-based metrics for evaluation instead of outcome-based metrics. The theory for the model presented here explicitly uses the concept of a Knowledge Value Collective that was introduced by Bozeman and Rogers [Bozeman, B., & Rogers, J. D. (2002). A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy, 31(5), 769-794; Rogers, J. D., & Bozeman, B. (2001). {"}Knowledge value alliances{"}: An alternative to the R&D project focus in evaluation. Science Technology & Human Values, 26(1), 23-55].",
author = "Elizabeth Corley",
year = "2007",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.09.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "21--35",
journal = "Evaluation and Program Planning",
issn = "0149-7189",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D

T2 - Illustrations from polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) research

AU - Corley, Elizabeth

PY - 2007/2

Y1 - 2007/2

N2 - Evaluating federally funded research and development (R&D) presents unique challenges to both federal science agencies and evaluators. Often focusing only on outcome evaluative measures (such as productivity or economic value) can shortchange the true value of the federal investment. For example, program directors at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) talk about the "value added" of the new interdisciplinary science centers that they have funded-and they hope to be able to capture how funding can generate increased capacity for new cutting-edge research in the future. The purpose of this paper is to present a use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D, which explicitly focuses on measuring capacity-based metrics for evaluation instead of outcome-based metrics. The theory for the model presented here explicitly uses the concept of a Knowledge Value Collective that was introduced by Bozeman and Rogers [Bozeman, B., & Rogers, J. D. (2002). A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy, 31(5), 769-794; Rogers, J. D., & Bozeman, B. (2001). "Knowledge value alliances": An alternative to the R&D project focus in evaluation. Science Technology & Human Values, 26(1), 23-55].

AB - Evaluating federally funded research and development (R&D) presents unique challenges to both federal science agencies and evaluators. Often focusing only on outcome evaluative measures (such as productivity or economic value) can shortchange the true value of the federal investment. For example, program directors at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) talk about the "value added" of the new interdisciplinary science centers that they have funded-and they hope to be able to capture how funding can generate increased capacity for new cutting-edge research in the future. The purpose of this paper is to present a use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D, which explicitly focuses on measuring capacity-based metrics for evaluation instead of outcome-based metrics. The theory for the model presented here explicitly uses the concept of a Knowledge Value Collective that was introduced by Bozeman and Rogers [Bozeman, B., & Rogers, J. D. (2002). A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy, 31(5), 769-794; Rogers, J. D., & Bozeman, B. (2001). "Knowledge value alliances": An alternative to the R&D project focus in evaluation. Science Technology & Human Values, 26(1), 23-55].

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845913772&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845913772&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.09.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 17689311

AN - SCOPUS:33845913772

VL - 30

SP - 21

EP - 35

JO - Evaluation and Program Planning

JF - Evaluation and Program Planning

SN - 0149-7189

IS - 1

ER -