NORDP 2018 Annual Research Development Conference

Concurrent Session 5
Wednesday, May 9, 2018, 2:15–3:15 p.m.

Strategies to Grow Research at a Branch Campus

Room: Potomac I  •  Pillar: Other Topics

Download the Presentation PDF


  • Sian Mooney, Arizona State University,
  • Susannah Gal, Penn State Harrisburg
  • Faye Farmer, Arizona State University


Smaller campuses, stand-alone branches, or satellite campuses have unique culture and climate. A research development professional must connect with and respect the faculty and resources within and across these campuses. Unique challenges for those developing research at these campus locations include, spatially distant resources, cultural discord, larger gaps in experience, and lack of connection to overarching university research activities. These issues are exacerbated in limited submissions and developing large collaborative teams to pursue higher dollar, more complex opportunities.

This panel presentation brings together presenters from two “R1” institutions to discuss the challenges faced, and strategies employed to catalyze and support a strong research culture and vigorous engagement in external funding activities at smaller branch/satellite campuses. Using their different positions and experience, the presenters will lead an engaging discussion on ways to increase engagement in research and increasing external funding. While some of the challenges may be specific to institutions with distributed campuses, concrete examples and successes in different contexts are useful for research development professionals at all types of institution.

We propose 3, 10-12 min, presentations outlining challenges, and the specific strategies employed to address these challenges as well as outcomes/successes to date. We are open to a fourth panelist and are actively looking for one so as to further expand the variety of experiences. The brief presentations will be designed to engage the audience and seed questions/challenges that can be discussed among the larger group of attendees and panelists.

Topics include: influencing faculty culture and motivation; expanding faculty engagement; developing and broadening research networks and teams; obtaining necessary resources and harnessing opportunities and support that may be spatially separate from the branch/satellite campus.

Gaining Strategic Insight from Internally Managed Research Information

Room: Potomac II  •  Pillar: Other Topics


  • Theo Bosnak, Digital Science & Research Solutions
  • Simon Porter, Digital Science & Research Solutions
  • Kelsey Rosell, Digital Science & Research Solutions


Developing a research strategy is a university conversation with no single answer and many voices. A myriad of questions come to the Research Development Professional from many directions and many levels within and outside the Institution – such as: How should a University invest its limited resources to improve its research quality/impact on the world? What are our key strengths/capabilities? Which external relationships should we put effort into, and in which areas? How best do we support existing research community? Which researchers should be involved?

Generally, external benchmarking is a blunt tool when used by itself, which provides very little insight into the internal structure of an institution. Journal level research categories are often too broad to provide deep understanding. You need the right data and analysis to bring structure to these conversations.

In the session, we will walk the audience through a new starting point for a research strategy using your own internal data on research.

  • Inter-Faculty collaboration patterns: which collaborations exist currently; how can these be strengthened; and where are the gaps?
  • Inter-Departmental collaboration: are current departmental structures those that might optimally support not only existing but also additional collaboration patterns?
  • Gender: is the gender balance in collaborative clusters evidently equitable and reflective of institutional policy?
  • International: how does collaboration compare with patterns elsewhere for other countries and for frequent partner institutions in those countries?/li>

In this session, the attendee will walk away with ideas and a view into on how to build deep narratives at multiple levels to drive strategic research discussions. You will be able to work outwards from your own internal research identity to reinvigorate and evolve analysis with more focus and greater reward. Greater analysis leads to better decisions and a more resilient portfolio.

The NSF Career: Approaches to Engage and Prepare Eligible Faculty

Room: Potomac III  •  Pillar: RD Fundamentals

Download the Presentation PDF


  • Jeff Agnoli, The Ohio State University
  • Beth Hodges, Florida State University
  • Susan Grimes, Purdue University
  • Esther Erkins, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis


The National Science Foundation's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Award Program provides five years of financial support for "junior faculty who exemplify the role of teacher-scholars through outstanding research, excellent education and the integration of education and research within the context of the mission of their organizations." This highly competitive award prepares junior faculty to be successful professors, and university success within the program is often considered a benchmark for overall research success in a university setting.

NORDP members from Florida State University, Ohio State University and Purdue University have all been engaged in efforts to assist their faculty who plan to apply to this program. These efforts have included panel presentations featuring successful award recipients, broader impacts/community partnering activities, and various online resources. During this session, attendees will be introduced to the program and its benefits, and will be provided with best practices. Presenters will discuss their differing experiences as well as outcomes. Additionally, presenters will share information gathered from an informal survey of university strategies and data on institutional CAREER success. The tools provided, though geared towards the CAREER program, can be extrapolated for other programs as well—which is essential in this ever shifting research climate.

Taking the Long View: How the History of Grant-Making and Research Can Help Us Now

Room: Potomac IV  •  Pillar: Professional Development

Download the Presentation PDF


  • Andrea Buford, Northern Illinois University


At first glance, it seems improbable that knowing more about how grants came to be, their multiple purposes over time, and how they are situated in the culture, can help anyone be a better research development professional. And yet, that is the claim and the goal of this session; knowing more about our past will help us to move forward with intention. Participants will leave the session with a new or refreshed knowledge of the history of grant making and the parallel historical perspective on the university’s role in knowledge collection, generation, and dissemination. We will use this perspective to reflect together about the emerging mission of higher education in research in this shifting research landscape. From there, the question immediately presents itself as to the proper and effective roles of Research Development professionals in that mission.

To accomplish these tasks, we will briefly consider the Greeks and the Romans and their efforts at organizing and supporting philanthropy and knowledge –sharing. We will move quickly to England and then to the framers of the U.S. Constitution. After a brief consideration of Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, we will move to the more modern era where we will look at the development of the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, and briefly consider changes to these agencies under each of the Bush presidencies. And of course, we will consider the current presidency as well.

Once we have well and truly made the point that governments and nation-states have always guided and constrained research, and knowledge more broadly, in response to urgent social concerns, we will open the group for guided reflection on the questions of our time. Is the role of the university in research changing yet again, arguably to a posture of knowledge protection and advocacy? If that is true, what is the role of Research Development in support of that mission?

Topics of Prominence: A New Way to Map the Global Research Landscape

Room: Potomac V  •  Pillar: Other Topics


  • Daniel Calto, Elsevier
  • Brad Fenwick, Elsevier
  • Asheq Rahman, Elsevier


This presentation will demonstrate recent advances in the use of metrics to model the global research landscape. Using a high-performance computing cluster analysis and direct citation links, this approach tracks over 8000 institutions’ performance in approximately 100,000 individual research topics. The analysis utilizes all of the nearly 70M indexed papers in the Scopus database, which indexes 22,000 active scientific, social scientific, and A&H journals in all research topics. Because of computing limitations, previous analytical approaches were unable to model the entire global corpus of literature. This new analysis allows universities, industries, and government funding agencies and policymakers to closely understand and track their research strengths and weaknesses, as well as to identify research opportunities and competitive threats, and to benchmark their performance against peer institutions and other countries.

Insights gained from this analysis can be used for a variety of purposes, from tracking advances in critical technologies to determining the right academic or industrial partner to develop new technologies, products, and services. In addition, a method to calculate a topic's momentum, which is highly correlates with the overall level of funding available, will be explained and demonstrated.

The presentation itself will briefly present the data and methods used, the reasons why this new approach constitutes a breakthrough, and include example use cases and a short system demonstration, time permitting, focused on applied R&D and manufacturing-related topics of interest to universities and R&D-intensive firms alike. The session is intermediate in its content; the primary goal is to understand this method's applicability to fine-grained university research analysis.

"So What Do You Do?": Findings From a Study of RD Professionals

Room: Potomac VI  •  Pillar: Professional Development

Download the Presentation PDF


  • Michael Preuss, West Texas A&M University
  • Kimberly Eck, University of Tennessee-Knoxville
  • Mary Fechner, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
  • Loren Walker, University of Massachusetts-Amherst


This presentation provides research-based description of the research development field and statistically significant differences within it. Research Development has existed as a defined area of professional practice for less than a decade and research-based, detailed descriptions of practitioners and their roles and responsibilities have yet to be developed. To address this gap, a survey-based investigation was undertaken with the NORDP membership as the informant population. All members were asked to complete a 21 question survey that sought demographic information as well as material related to respondents’ professional background, education, employer, employment history, and areas of responsibility. 187 distinct individuals, approximately 25% of the NORDP membership responded. Descriptive and inferential statistical analysis showing patterns and significant differences within the data set, most notably in respect to comparisons between proposal development officers and directors of research development, will be presented by the research team. The presentation goals are to: 1) provide evidence-based descriptions of key research development roles and associated responsibilities, 2) describe important and statistically significant differences in the survey responses, and 3) describe how the survey outcomes can inform professional and leadership development in RD. Attendees will learn of and be asked to discuss implications for personal and professional development, leadership strategies, and personnel recruitment. Four of five Pillars of RD will be addressed as the information presented is applicable to all levels of research development and critical for proper understanding of the nature of the RD enterprise, for clear understanding of how to approach professional development and advancement in the field, and for appropriate strategic leadership in the research development.

Responding RAPIDly and Remaining NIIMBL in the Manufacturing USA Proposal Development Landscape: Adapting Resources in a Changing Research Landscape

Room: Tidewater 2  •  Pillar: Other Topics

Download the Presentation PDF


  • Leigh Botner, University of Delaware
  • Kathleen Sanford, University of Delaware
  • Dawn Jory, University of Delaware


The Manufacturing USA Network (previously the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, or NNMI), are public-private partnerships that are initiated through significant (i.e., $70M or larger) investments from federal agencies in the form of contracts or cooperative agreements, which is leveraged against a minimum 1:1 cost share from institute partners that include state governments, industry partners, academic institutions, and non-profits organizations. Funded Institutes bring together industry, academia and government to innovate manufacturing processes in different technology spaces and fuel a skilled workforce, thus advancing US manufacturing competitiveness.

Managing the proposal development process for large scale, interdisciplinary, multi-institutional proposals that require large amounts of cost share like the Manufacturing USA proposals is challenging but achievable. Our session will analyze the proposal development efforts from three separate Manufacturing USA applications at our institution to be awarded funding to lead The National Institute for Innovation in Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals (NIIMBL) and participate as a large subcontractor in the Rapid Advancement in Process Intensification Deployment Institute (RAPID). Because Manufacturing USA institutes as large public-private consortia that require significant cost share commitments from a large number and diverse set of organizations, the proposal development process is complex and presents challenges for research development offices on a significant scale. Our presentation will share our experiences and lessons learned to be successful, which we have adapted to other large scale proposals, such as requiring strategic leadership, buy-in from partners at all levels of the participating organizations, rapid shifting of non-traditional proposal development resources and the ability to remain engaged and nimble within the external program environment.

Ideas Lab Workshop: Once a Grand Challenge Topic has been Selected: Issues & Decisions from the University and the Research Team Perspectives (Part 2)

Room: Lincoln, 3rd floor  •  Pillar: Idea Lab

Download the Presentation PDF


  • Eva Allen, Indiana University
  • Sarah Archibald, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  • Jennifer Lyon Gardner, The University of Texas at Austin
  • Michelle Popowitz, UCLA
  • Sarah Rovito, Association of Public and Land-grant Universities
  • Amy Spellacy, The Ohio State University


One of two sessions organized by members of a newly formed Community of Practice for University-Led Grand Challenges. Building on the recently published Report on University-Led Grand Challenges, participants will discuss topics related to what issues and decisions arise after a Grand Challenge or research team has been selected. Participants will be given the option to engage in discussions from both the University perspective and the perspective of the research team proposing a specific Grand Challenge (or similar large scale effort). This session is designed for participants to share their experiences and learn from their peers. As there are more topics to discuss than feasibly can be addressed in one hour, the organizers will send out a survey via the NORDP listserv in advance to narrow the topics. The goals for the session are to enhance knowledge, share best practices, provide networking opportunities and identify ways the Community of Practice might work together to support those campuses pursuing solutions to Grand Challenges.

NOTE: While this is one of two sessions, the two sessions are designed to be complementary; participants will encounter different topics in each session, and may usefully attend either one of the two, or both sessions.