Good practice in contracting
Contracting practice forms an important part of the good practice guideline programme SPEaR is developing.
The first stage of development included workshops and the identification of underpinning principles. These principles have then been applied to four initial areas and the draft material workshopped further. Areas drafted to date are: contracting, ethics, R&E involving Māori and R&E involving Pasifika.
SPEaR Principal Analyst Raewyn Good says that the draft guidelines should be seen as evolving documents. “People can go to the SPEaR website and use them, send us feedback, contribute examples, raise issues and be a part of this process. Currently, the drafts are in Word format with footnotes. In 2006, we will be transferring the draft material to PDF so that examples and reference documents will be more readily accessible. We really want people to contribute examples.
“With the contracting section, we looked at the drivers and processes within contracting agencies and developed a system diagram (see right) that takes people through the various stages in a project life cycle. Applying the principles, we then developed draft wording for the stages and steps and began collecting real examples to illustrate the guidance,” Raewyn says.
The good practice programme is a contribution to building capacity and capability in the sector. Experience was showing a number of points in the R&E life cycle where practice could be improved.
“For example, people usually agree that before deciding to commission some research work, it is wise to do some investigation about what is already known – but what is often not shared is where to look, who to ask, and what to look for. A lot of effort can be put into duplicating or partially duplicating information that is already known to others in the sector, because the people asking, or those being asked, either don’t know the range of places to find out what exists, or do not have the time to access the various sources or to assess its utility.”
Raewyn says this can lead to a series of one-off small-scale projects, with short deadlines, instead of building programmes of knowledge. The result can be repeated cycles of work that do not build on previous learning.
“One of the ways we can work smarter is to think about using administrative data more, to find out what other agencies have done, to use skilled librarians and records people to help develop key words for publication searches and filing database queries and widen the time horizons and locations looked in,” Raewyn says.
“We have also noticed there is a tendency for parts of the sector to discount research published more than three to five years ago. Sometimes this is wise as the policy or legal framework has significantly altered. But a lot of human behaviour patterns change much more slowly and, depending on the issue, work that was done well 20 or 40 years ago may still be relevant, and minor updating could be a sensible option.”
Raewyn says that if after working through such aspects and issues it is decided the research is still needed, the next decision is whether the work can done in-house or externally, and to assign a project manager. “That can often be when timing aspects become really important. There isn’t a large pool of potential contractors sitting waiting for work and in-house people’s work programmes are often set well in advance. A further complication arises in that policy cycles and associated budgets tend to be annual but the R&E cycle isn’t.
“Once a decision to contract has been made, the guidelines can assist people through the process including consultation, progress reporting, applying intellectual property rights equitably, ensuring the findings are presented so others are able to access and use the information, and keeping an eye on that use after the project may seem to have finished.”
For more information, go to www.spear.govt.nz or email info@spear.govt.nz or raewyn.good002@msd.govt.nz
