Zoom Logo

KE Concordat: Working transparently and ethically - Shared screen with speaker view
Lesley Paterson
17:11
@Matthew it looks like you are hanging from ceiling by your ankles in my Zoom call
Matthew Guest
17:53
oh dear how strange... I shall leave and return
Lesley Paterson
18:49
@Matthew - not to worry; there is at least one other - it must by my pooter not you...*shrugs shoulders*
Phil Fiddaman
21:26
You're still in Oz for me Matthew :-)
Cheryl Metcalf
37:08
I agree - it has quite clear ‘transparency’ enablers, but lacks the rigorous thinking where ethics is concerned
Shanta Coles
39:17
Hi Richard, thanks for your comments. Does the OU have a policy/guidance regarding who you will and won't work with? For example based on environmental considerations?
Caroline Demetriou Canterbury Christ Church
40:42
The formality would possibly be a barrier to engaging. They were concerned that formalising the process would stifle the organic nature of their KE activity and this could back up that concern.
Katie O'Reilly-B
40:49
I second Shanta's question - but in terms of making those discussions based on political considerations, e.g. working with certain governmental bodies. where does the ownership lie of those contentious relationships?
Chris Lord
42:00
greg - i'd like to come back on Tamsin's gatekeep point
Richard Holliman
43:06
I can come back on Katie's point after Chris.
Kathy Woods, UoC
44:49
The principles of the Concordat are useful in informing and setting strategic objectives, but Richard and Tamsin raise valid points about operationalising, incentivising and engaging staff - beyond the usual suspects.
Karim Sorefan
46:37
scientists are trained to understand that no research is unethical, only the applications of the research may be unethical. the issue here arises because the academic is working with a partner that is also applying the research.
Richard Holliman
48:00
Can I come back on incentivising?
Caroline Fleming
49:12
There are changes occurring in how the UK treats subsidies and what a subsidy is defined as (coming out of the EU state aid frame work). This impacts on transparency and preferential engagement of businesses. Should this be considered in the concordat? and how?
Lesley Paterson
55:49
Couldn't agree more re: Rick's comment: so many prof services staff asked to facilitate long term engagement/KE culture change on a one year contract. It's bananas. Can't see at present - how the KEC directly incentivises looking after KE staff....
Richard Holliman
57:05
thanks Lesley
Richard Holliman
01:01:29
Following up on the discussion, this is the open access pamphlet on Creating Publics: http://oro.open.ac.uk/42551.
Phil Fiddaman
01:01:45
Agree entirely on the incentivisation issue wrt KE professional careers. However, a lot of KE posts, in England, are HEIF funded and even though HEIF has been around for over 16 years and has significantly increased in total value it is still largely seen as 'temporary' funding by HEIs and if HEIF allocations drop then posts go or not replaced. HEIF is absolutely welcome and really boosts professional capacity but take HEIF away are HEIs committed to funding KE posts with their own funds?
Matthew Guest
01:03:09
HEIF of course was removed from many smaller providers several years ago. it makes it incredibly hard to fund KE posts
Richard Holliman
01:03:24
Good point Phil - my view is that KE needs the equivalent of QR funding for KE. Longer-term, baseline funding.
Tamsin Mann, PraxisAuril
01:03:51
And we know that the experience in Wales is relevant here, when HEIF equivalent was withdrawn KE posts were mostly on a project-by-project footing.
Matthew Guest
01:04:00
and that makes sense Richard. Going to the full diversity of providers
Richard Holliman
01:06:02
If you're interested in moral imperatives, I gave this talk on promoting epistemic justice through knowledge exchange last year: http://oro.open.ac.uk/73445/
Lesley Paterson
01:06:19
Indeed: but there are unis out there who find the funds no probs for Research Facilitators (not knocking RFs - marvellous people) so why not KE facilitators? It's cause RFs get loadsa research funds; the value of KE not yet seen (including socio-economic impacts; social justice etc etc)
Sonja Vujovic
01:08:14
Where ethics and transparency have made a difference in my experience has been in setting out clearly our drivers and limitations to KE partners (especially commercial ones). Explaining to partners what our responsibilities and drivers are in terms of commercialising publicly funded research
Shanta Coles
01:09:30
Thank You.
Jo Crotty
01:09:43
thank you
gareth davies
01:09:47
Thank you. Very interesting discussion. Much appreciated.
Lesley Paterson
01:09:49
Thanks to all the speakers.
Gurmit Kler
01:09:56
Great discussion once again. Thank you
Greta Paa-Kerner
01:10:04
Thanks. You are progressing quicker through the principles than our institution is.
Cheryl Metcalf
01:10:06
Excellent discussion - thank you
Clare Davies
01:10:17
Really useful discussion, thanks all
Phil Fiddaman
01:10:24
Thank you all
Tim Strickland
01:10:35
thanks very useful
Rachel York - DMU
01:10:37
Thank you
Marie McMillan Guy
01:10:38
Thanks!
Emma Calverley
01:10:40
thanks
Alex Morton
01:10:40
Thank you
Jonathan Freeman
01:10:40
Thank you! Very useful.
Helen Sargeant University of Wolverhampton
01:10:44
really useful, thank you
Ian Hutchinson
01:10:45
Thank you!