INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION
Researcher Applications
Extraordinary Meeting of RIISG Working Group #4
20th August 2012
MINUTES
PRESENT:
Tim Barnes, Executive Director, UCL Advances (TB)
Andrew Clark, Director of Research Planning, Research Services (AC)
Anthony Finkelstein, Dean of Engineering (AF)
Graham Hunt, Head of Research Applications and Services ISD (GH)
Krista Macmillan, Database and Website Manager, UCL Advances (KM)
Gavin McLachlan, Director of Information Systems, ISD (GM)
Anthony Peacock, Advanced Information Services Centre (AP)
David Selwood, Faculty of Medical Sciences (DS)
APOLOGIES:
Donna Williamson, Faculty Manager, UCL Faculty of Mathematical & Physical
Sciences (DW)
1. Matters Discussed
1.1. Welcome and Introduction
1.1.1. GH opened the meeting and noted that the capture and exposure of
Knowledge Transfer Activities had been taken out of the original IRIS
Enhancements Budget for 2012/13. Thus the purpose of the
extraordinary meeting was to address the July 2012 IRIS Project Board
action point on Knowledge Transfer Activities that states “This work to
be scoped and defined by Working Group 4 (Researcher Applications)
as a separate bid to be submitted via RIISG for additional funds”. The
original scope of the project included requirements gathering, building
Extraordinary Meeting of RIISG Working Group #4 – Minutes 20th August 2012
2
and to add knowledge transfer information into IRIS via a structured
form. It was agreed that if the capture and exposure of Knowledge
Transfer Activities were added as a functionality in IRIS there would be
no need to submit a separate bid via RIISG. It was therefore agreed to
canvas for more funds to support this project.
1.2. General discussion regarding the possibility of a Knowledge Transfer
Activity Form in IRIS
GH noted that Knowledge Transfer and Impact are not readily or currently
systemically captured in any UCL system and it was noted that this is the only
redline issue with the SMT and Council.
AF commented that ‘Knowledge Transfer’ and ‘Impact’ are not the same
things and we need to be careful about the semantics when discussing this.
TB suggested that researchers must enter their Knowledge Transfer Activities
into a form in IRIS and this could be done retrospectively, similar to the
appraisal process. AF suggested a “back capture” of this information.
TB noted that increasingly research grants require evidence and as such this
functionality would enhance the research grant application process as well as
provide a public record of research outcomes at UCL.
The question of what counts as Research Impact/Outcome was raised, and
the question of whether the collection of Knowledge Transfer Activities would
overlap with the REF process. It was noted that there are certain aspects
such as public engagement or educational activities that do not overlap with
REF, but it may be useful to store this information for future (post 2014) REF
assessments.
The need to look at conflicts of interests was noted as there are some things
which are not allowed to be declared. There may be a need to have conflicts
of interests and databases exposed externally.
AF would prefer Grants to be linked to Activities and the Activities to be linked
to Outputs (Publications).
It was agreed that if there is a trade-off of accuracy, ease of use and
compliance we should go with ease of use.
Extraordinary Meeting of RIISG Working Group #4 – Minutes 20th August 2012
3
1.3. Conclusions
1.3.1. It was agreed that this form would sit in IRIS and to ask the IRIS project
board to prioritise Knowledge Transfer Activities as the number one
priority.
1.3.2. Proposed timeline:

September 2012 – release the new version and platform

November 2012 – Knowledge Transfer Form ready
1.3.3. AF suggested a working trial and getting 30 or so researchers to fill it in
to learn about how good the form and the fields are.
1.3.4. It was agreed that a communication plan was needed to ensure all
stakeholders understand the value of the process.
1.3.5. It was recommended that the VPR, VPE, HR, Public Engagement
Office and IRIS Board must sign off on this and make it a formal
process.
1.3.6. It was agreed that if there is a trade-off of accuracy, ease of use and
compliance – should go with ease of use.
2. Action Points
No.
Date first
raised
Minute
Owner
Action
1
20/08/2012
1.3.1
GH
Ask IRIS project board to
prioritise Knowledge Transfer
2
20/08/2012
1.3.2
GH
Knowledge Transfer Form
ready
3
20/08/2012
1.3.3
GH
Working Trial
4
20/08/2012
1.3.4
GH
Communication plan
5
20/08/2012
1.3.5
GH
Getting all parties to sign off
on this process to formalise it
3. Next Meeting - TBA
Status
Notes