Shows increased research productivity in primary care faculty, suggesting effective leadership and a supportive culture are key.
Efforts to foster the growth of a department's or school's research mission can be informed by known correlates of research productivity, but the specific strategies to be adopted will be highly context-dependent, influenced by local, national, and discipline-specific needs and resources. The authors describe a multifaceted approach-informed by a working model of organizational research productivity-by which the University of Minnesota Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (Twin Cities campus) successfully increased its collective research productivity during a 10-year period (1997-2007) and maintained these increases over time.Facing barriers to recruitment of faculty investigators, the department focused instead on nurturing high-potential investigators among their current faculty via a new, centrally coordinated research program, with provision of training, protected time, technical resources, mentoring, and a scholarly culture to support faculty research productivity. Success of these initiatives is documented by the following: substantial increases in the department's external research funding, rise to a sustained top-five ranking based on National Institutes of Health funding to U.S. family medicine departments, later-stage growth in the faculty's publishing record, increased research capacity among the faculty, and a definitive maturation of the department's research mission. The authors offer their perspectives on three apparent drivers of success with broad applicability-namely, effective leadership, systemic culture change, and the self-awareness to adapt to changes in the local, institutional, and national research environment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Weber‐Main et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: