How Norwegian civil servants use research in their day-to-day work is the topic of the thesis Using Research: Perspectives from inside policy organizations, which Kari-Elisabeth Vambeseth Skogen defended for her PhD at TIK, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture at the University of Oslo in January.
Skogen has been concerned with the gap between academic thinking and practical administration since she started working at the Ministry of Education and Research in 2013. As a new employee, she missed training in how to find, assess and use research.
Many questions were swirling in her head: "How am I supposed to carry out my bureaucratic duties in a sound way and work in a research-based manner? How do we actually do this as a civil service? How should I navigate?"
- I did not know enough about where to look for research-based knowledge or how to assess its quality and relevance. It seemed there were quite a few different practices, says Skogen.
Several of the new civil servant's first assumptions are confirmed in the doctoral thesis that she, as a more experienced civil servant and researcher, defended thirteen years later. The thesis is part of the Public Sector PhD scheme (OFFPHD), funded by the Research Council of Norway. As a PhD candidate she was affiliated with the research project OSIRIS - Oslo Institute for Research on the Impact of Science, where they have studied how research is used and makes a difference, including in policymaking.
Concerned that impact assessments are knowledge-based
Kari-Elisabeth Vambeseth Skogen's thesis is based on an extensive literature review, a survey in which over 1,600 civil servants from all ministries, with one exception, responded, and in-depth interviews with 23 people in three ministries.
- Civil servants in Norwegian ministries, regardless of their level, report that using research is important in their daily work.
Her impression is that civil servants are aware of their responsibility and know that what the state, the ministries and the government decide has a major direct impact on us as individuals and on society as a whole.
- So, what politicians base their decisions on matters a great deal. There is a seriousness here that we who work in the civil service are very conscious of, says Skogen.
Skogen's research reveals, however, that many civil servants have their own individual habits and practices concerning practice in use of research.
The interviews also showed that staff had different strategies when they did not get immediate access to the relevant research they were looking for. Some settled to search for something else, others found alternative routes and links, some went via the library for help. Yet others contacted the researcher behind the study directly to gain access. Those who gave up quickly often did not know what alternatives were available.
Limited sharing of knowledge
Skogen was surprised that civil servants could sit close to colleagues who had more expertise than they did in using research, without there being any system in place for transferring this competence.
- There are also differences in which criteria individuals apply when they assess quality and relevance. While those with research experience more often draw on scientific criteria, others without similar experience may focus more on whether data are new or close in context, she says.
The findings also showed that there is relatively little to learn from colleagues.
- Everyone does as well as they can or tries their best. But we talk too little to each other, says Kari-Elisabeth Vambeseth Skogen.
Many contributors to the final document
Her studies also revealed that individual practices can have their advantages.
- Complementary practices can mean that, together, we gain access to more sources and a broad knowledge base. The ministries also never rely on a single input. They are hierarchical institutions, and both bureaucratic documents and policy advise pass through many layers and are thoroughly reworked before they are finalized, says Skogen.
She emphasizes that the end result - the recommendations, documents and knowledge bases that are produced through this way of working - is usually thorough and robust. In addition, Skogen's thesis shows how the different documents produced build on each other.
In this way, the different practices are brought together into a larger system.
As she researched how civil servants use research, it became increasingly clear to Skogen that it is difficult to measure the direct effect of such research.
- Research creeps in from various sources into different documents and accumulates over time together with other types of knowledge. Meaning that research is used, but rarely in a way that allows you to point out and say that this specific piece of research led to that specific policy change, she says.
Time pressure can be a problem for quality assurance
Another feature of the times was that Kari-Elisabeth Vambeseth Skogen's informants reported increasing time pressure in recent years.
- At times, the media set the agenda and demand rapid responses from the minister and the civil service. Parliament also requests a lot of answers, says Skogen, explaining that much of the work in the ministries is devoted to providing these.
What worried her informants was what this time pressure might mean for the quality of the policy advise and knowledge bases produced by the civil service.
She questions whether urgent inquiries might lead to long-term, important analytical work that is not urgently being downprioritized, and to knowledge reserves not being built up.
- If that is where we end up, over time we will also be less able to respond adequately to urgent commissions, says Skogen.
Balance between being on the inside and having an outsider's perspective
As an "insider", Kari-Elisabeth Vambeseth Skogen has had unique access to informants and to the culture in the ministries, while at the same time striving to maintain the necessary distance required as a researcher.
- The dual role has largely been an advantage, not least the direct access to many informants and the opportunity for observation. The fact that I am very familiar with bureaucratic language has probably also been beneficial, says Skogen.
- And my strategy - precisely that I am an "insider" - has been to describe the situation as it is, to find out how research is used, and not to point out mistakes.
She emphasizes, however, that on the basis of her findings she put forward proposals for improvement: more information-sharing, better training for new employees, and more predictable routines for the use and accessibility of research.
Among other things, she proposes:
- That time be set aside to work on long-term analytical tasks that are not urgent, because this is crucial for our ability to respond to demanding urgent inquiries,
- More effective systems for storing and retrieving documents,
- That civil servants are curious and more openly discuss and share experiences with each other about how they search for, assess and use research, and
- More training.
