Interdisciplinary funding for impactful research

By Ellie MacPherson, Knowledge Exchange Lead, College of Social Sciences; Mariana Rios Maldonado, Research Impact Adviser, Research Services Directorate; Gordon Meiklejohn, Knowledge Exchange & Impact Manager, Research Services Directorate,; Sarah Weakley, Knowledge Exchange Lead, College of Social Sciences; Fraser Rowan, College Knowledge Exchange and Innovation Manager, College of Arts and Humanities; Louise Mason, Head of Innovation and Enterprise, College of Medicine, Veterinary and Life Sciences; and Caroline Hogarth, Impact Accelerator Account, Knowledge Exchange Associate

Supporting researchers to cross disciplinary divides is crucial to creating research that delivers real-world impact. Take, for example, global health crises such as COVID-19 or mpox: addressing such these outbreaks requires both the rapid development of a vaccine through STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields, as well as a deep understanding of human behaviour from SHAPE (social sciences, humanities, and the arts for people and the economy) disciplines. In these contexts, no single academic discipline holds all the answers. Further, for academic research to create positive change, it is not enough to develop solutions, they need to be co-developed with research users, such as policymakers, healthcare providers, and communities – to ensure these solutions reflect diverse perspectives and priorities.

Impact Acceleration Account: enabling real world impact

The University of Glasgow (UofG) is one of only five UK institutions to internally manage Impact Acceleration Accounts (IAA) across six UKRI funding councils. The purpose of these funding accounts is to support researchers to connect with research users to ensure their research has real world impact. This unique positioning provides an opportunity to pilot innovative approaches particularly around interdisciplinary funding, supporting research that addresses complex societal challenges through collaborative, user-focused solutions.

In January 2024, the University of Glasgow launched a pilot joint IAA funding call to support interdisciplinary knowledge exchange projects. This initiative was designed and implemented collaboratively by research professional staff managing all the University’s IAA accounts, drawing together teams from the four university colleges as well as the central Knowledge Exchange and Impact team. A key requirement of the call was that projects must span at least two research councils and directly address the needs of non-academic partners.

We conducted the funding call in two stages, beginning with an Expression of Interest (EOI), followed by a full application process. Research Professional colleagues supported applicants at each stage, providing guidance and detailed application reviews. An innovative element of the process was the inclusion of a Project Enhancement Workshop. This workshop adapted methodologies from the Arts & Humanities Partnership Catalyst —a design-led knowledge exchange programme developed by the College of Arts & Humanities—to support academics through shared learning and reflection.

The hallmarks of high-quality knowledge exchange projects

A panel representing the breadth of research across the institution assessed proposals based on five criteria:

1. The potential of the underpinning research to generate impact
2. The potential reach and significance of the impact
3. Interdisciplinary reciprocity
4. The role of the partner
5. The clarity of the definition of ‘partner need’

These criteria are the hallmarks of high-quality knowledge exchange projects. Our aim is to build on the research conducted at Glasgow to create a platform for developing and delivering impactful outcomes beyond academia.

Notably, the ‘quality’ of the underpinning research is less of a priority in the context of this fund than its potential to generate impact—though, of course, the two are inherently connected. We sought proposals that demonstrated the contribution and benefit of different disciplines, emphasising mutual benefit and distinct contributions from each discipline. This approach aims to avoid tokenistic inclusion or one-way transfer of expertise and knowledge. High-quality knowledge exchange projects respond to specific and identified societal needs, collaborating with partners to deliver impact. Therefore, we looked for projects that clearly articulated the need they were addressing, defined the partner’s role within the project, and outlined how the partnership would extend beyond the project’s conclusion.

To enhance future interdisciplinary calls and strengthen the support provided by Research Professionals for collaborative and impactful research, we sought to capture participants’ experiences through an evaluation of the call.

Evaluating the IAA call

Data collected include:

• One-on-one conversations with participants from each stage of the process
• A structured questionnaire sent to all applicants named on the submissions
• A reflective workshop for the Research Professional Staff involved in the call.

We wanted to share three key reflections from the process for other Research Professional colleagues working in this space. Below we categorise our learning into three themes:

1. The power of community learning and sharing

The Project Enhancement Workshop was designed to create a collegial environment that fostered psychological safety, enabling applicant teams to openly share and develop their ideas. Teams delivered short pitches outlining their partnerships, the problem they aimed to address, the role of each discipline, and the solutions they sought to create. Structured pairing sessions were introduced to promote cross-project insights and reinforce a collaborative, interdisciplinary culture.

This workshop was held with participants who had been shortlisted to submit full applications. While feedback highlighted the positive impact of this format, participants suggested that future workshops should be scheduled earlier in the bid development process—ideally before the Expression of Interest phase—to better support cross-disciplinary pairing.

2. Building time, trust, and equity in interdisciplinary partnerships

A recurring theme from researchers and Research Professional Staff was the need for sufficient time and trust to foster interdisciplinary partnerships.  The timelines for the funding call were seen as quite short, particularly for building new partnerships across disciplines, and centring the needs of non-academic partners such as those in the third sector, government, and industry.

Navigating power hierarchies is also crucial; bridging the perceived STEM/SHAPE divide requires fully integrating the methodologies, perspectives, and expertise of the humanities and social sciences, rather than treating them as add-ons. Our role as Research Professionals was to support this process throughout the application stage and during the project enhancement workshop. In the workshop, clear ground rules were established for providing constructive feedback, fostering a collegial and inclusive environment.

Another important element in ensuring equity in the use of single PIs.  During the enhancement workshop we referred to the teams by the name of the Principal Investigator (PI). However, participants highlighted that relying on a single PI within interdisciplinary projects reinforces hierarchies by concentrating authority in one individual. As a short-term solution, participants suggested using a project name instead of focusing on a single individual to represent the team. More broadly, we need to rethink teamwork within interdisciplinary projects to develop models that better reflect and support collaborative and equitable contributions from all members.

3. Balancing flexibility and clarity in funding criteria

The criteria for the call required applications to span at least two research councils, with the aim of encouraging originality in proposals. However, our evaluation revealed some confusion among both researchers and Research Professional Staff regarding the call’s requirements. For example, some assumed that applications needed to involve all four colleges to be successful.

One key reflection is that avoiding overly prescriptive criteria in future calls could allow for natural synergies to emerge in interdisciplinary funding. This insight also highlights the importance of investing time in establishing clear definitions, maintaining consistent communication, and fostering shared expectations among all team members involved in supporting the call.

Looking ahead

At the University of Glasgow, the management of the IAA accounts operates both within the four Colleges and centrally through collaborative working groups. These groups have worked to embed organisational practices that enable Research Professional Staff to adopt a holistic approach, foster alignment across different funding accounts, and facilitate interdisciplinary funding. Examples include aligning application forms

 and synchronising the timings of funding calls to ensure consistency and coherence.

Reflecting on the evaluation findings, extending timelines and scheduling earlier engagement opportunities could enhance these collaborative efforts. The IAA pilot also highlighted the importance of relationship building between Research Professional staff working across colleges and disciplines. The joint nature of the IAA call provided opportunities to further deepen relationships and idea-sharing- critical for an inclusive and collaborative environment.

Now, more than ever, solutions-focused interdisciplinary research is crucial to addressing complex societal challenges, breaking down silos, and embedding research users at the heart of projects. Our evaluation demonstrated some concrete lessons for future calls.

• Curating spaces for researchers from diverse disciplines to come together and share ideas fosters new collaborations. The Partnership Catalyst approach, used in the workshop for this call, proved effective in encouraging cross-learning and promoting equitable sharing.

• Given the importance of relationship-building, providing more generous timelines for funding calls is essential to support meaningful interdisciplinary partnerships.
  
• Building connections and facilitating learning among Research Professional Staff across different colleges proved highly valuable, emphasising the importance of cross-discipline collaboration that extends beyond academics to include those in vital support roles.
  
• To support equitable interdisciplinary research, we must move beyond single PI-focused models and embrace team-based approaches that reflect collaborative contributions. Given this has wider importance for interdisciplinary research, using internally managed funds could be a good vehicle for testing different approaches.
  
• Truly impactful projects require partners’ needs and priorities to be embedded from the very start of the project, ensuring alignment and relevance. Ensuring funding for this early development stage is also important even if the impact will be seen in the future.

By embedding these lessons into future calls, we hope to make a more inclusive and impactful research ecosystem.

We would like to acknowledge the efforts of Neil McIntyre and Natalia Popielska, who provided expert support on the development and delivery of the Joint Call.