Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

Research Ethics Monthly | ISSN 2206-2483

Why resourcing practice is a better option for institutions than policing compliance

Posted by Dr Gary Allen
in Human Research Ethics,Services
on July 25, 2021
0 Comments
Keywords Ethical review,Governance,Institutional Responsibilities,Participant protection,Research Ethics Committees,Researcher responsibilities,Resourcing practice
Yellow tape blocks off a crime scene with broken glass

Dr Gary Allen

Over the course of the last three decades, institutions have been paying far more attention to institutional risk if their researchers do not adhere to national human research ethics or research integrity standards (such as in Australia National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research).  Those of us who practice in these spheres have done a good job in highlighting to directors and the executive level the risks of the regulator, the government and/or the media concluding that an individual researcher has breached the national standards.

Perhaps we have done too good a job, because it is being approached as a matter that needs to be policed, with institutional sanctions for researchers who are deemed not to have met the national standards.

Evidence of this can be found in institutional professional development strategies that almost exclusively focus upon the sanctions that are associated with an individual failing to meet those standards.

There is logic in this for an institution because it is reducing the harm an institution might suffer.  But it is an argument that at least some researchers won’t find compelling.  Nor does it do anything to help improve the way they design, conduct or report the results of their research.

For some researchers, the whole topic and its impact for their research can seem esoteric at best.  In addition, professional development activities can often rely on the use of examples of research misconduct that are not Australian and/or of limited relevance to the broad range of research disciplines at an institution.

We also need to get beyond form filling and box-ticking in our thinking and in our approach. We are not fans of expensive ‘off the shelf’ packages that use multiple choice questions and that rarely acknowledge disciplinary/methodological differences.

To be of perceived value, professional development strategies need to be focused upon good practice and building a positive reputation.

We also need to draw upon the latest in pedagogical practice.  “Talk and chalk” stopped being a useful approach many decades ago.  It is not a useful way to engage people who are themselves educators.

Our understanding of good practice needs to draw upon the wisdom of the crowd and the research culture within our institutions.  Within this context, we might refer to the national standards, but our obvious intention is to improve ethical thinking and practice, not improve adherence to a national rule.

Individual professional development activities must involve participants applying concepts and principles to a realistic problem or challenge.  The activity should allow for and celebrate, novel and innovative approaches that can be applied to real-world situations.  Being able to say that ideas from a session will be used to improve institutional policy, procedure or guidelines would be a fantastic result – and signal to researchers that their collaboration is welcome and useful.

Institutions that are serious about risk management should be investing at least as much (if not more) on professional development activities as they do on review processes.  Yes, the implications are if you are spending a six-figure amount on a research management system, you should be spending a comparable amount on your professional development strategies.

AHRECS is very proud of our work in this space.  Send an email to enquiry@ahrecs.com if you would like to discuss us doing some work with your institution.

Also see

A seven-minute video about the resourcing reflective practice approach.

Allen, G and Israel, M (in press, 2017) Moving beyond Regulatory Compliance: Building Institutional Support for Ethical Reflection in Research. In Iphofen, R and Tolich, M (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics. London: Sage.

Israel M, Allen, G & Thomson, C (2016) Australian Research Ethics Governance: Plotting the Demise of the Adversarial Culture. In van den Hoonaard, W & Hamilton, A (eds) The Ethics Rupture: Exploring Alternatives to Formal Research-Ethics Review. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Allen, G (2008) Getting Beyond Form Filling: The Role of Institutional Governance in Human Research Ethics. Journal of Academic Ethics 6/2, pp105-116. ISSN 1570-1727

This post may be cited as:
Allen, G. (24 July 2021) Why resourcing practice is a better option for institutions than policing compliance. Research Ethics Monthly. Retrieved from: https://ahrecs.com/why-resourcing-practice-is-a-better-option-for-institutions-than-policing-compliance/

Related reading

Internal Human Research Ethics annual reporting

An ethics argument for data sharing

Research ethics reviews: responding to the challenges faced by international postgraduate students

Element Zero: What’s missing from the National Statement to support Consumer and Community Involvement in health research?

Nobody expects…

Ethics CoPs not Ethics Police: Building communities of practice in ethics and integrity

The Tower of Babel and Human Research Ethics

Should we accept funding for facial recognition research, and other dilemmas?

A rose by any other name….?

If you build it, they will come- 2020 Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) Training Conference (online) 18-20 Nov

Going video: A chance to change review practice?

A poor call and two missed opportunities, but otherwise not a bad proposed revision to NS s5

Is it time to extend the required membership of research ethics committees?

Reframing Indigenous consultation: engagement and risk management

Updated checklist for HDR Supervisors

How we interpret the words ‘proportional review’

A checklist to assist a supervisor to check a candidate’s research ethics review application

Can I use your answers anyway?

Research ethics review during a time of pandemic

Lost time may never be found again but is it time to talk about the duration of ethics approvals?

The Ethics and Politics of Qualitative Data Sharing

A users perspective on the ethics application process in Australia-room for improvement

A preliminary geneaology of research ethics review and Māori

The research use of online data/web 2.0 comments

Should we Reframe Research Ethics as a Professional Ethics?

Proportional processes can sometimes be the answer to a few (apparently competing) problems

Research Ethics Review as a Box-Ticking Exercise

“Reminder about service options and an easy way to pay AHRECS,” we say… aware of how corporate sleazy that sounds

Is it something I said (or the way I said it)?

Monitoring research is too important to be optional and too resource intensive to be manual

Reflections on chairing a human research ethics committee

Institutional approaches to evaluative practice

Conducting research with (not on) consumers in health – exploring ethical considerations

Ten ways of ensuring affordable professional development in your institution

The value of respect in human research ethics: a conceptual analysis and a practical guide

Justice in Human Research Ethics: A Conceptual and Practical Guide

How do we ‘do’ consent?

Contextualising Merit and Integrity within Human Research: A Summary

Release of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (updated 2018) – With interview

Research Ethics in Australia: A Story

The complex art of benefit-sharing

Can Your HREC Benefit from Coaching?

On the Problem of “Worldlessness”. Do The Declaration of Helsinki and the Council for International Organizations of Medical Science Guidelines Protect the Stateless in the Research Context?

“More what you’d call guidelines”

Disaster Research and its Ethical Review

‘Don’t mention the c word: Covert research and the stifling ethics regime in the social sciences’

Magical incantations and the tyranny of the template

A Model for the Participation of Indigenous Children and Young People in Research

Research Ethics in the Philippines: a personal journey

‘Except as required by law’: Australian researchers’ legal rights and obligations regarding participant confidentiality

Making Indigenous research ethics a compulsory facet of supervisor development and student training

Can you hear us? The Queensland experience of health research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

A place for expedited ethics review of time-critical above-low risk research

Taking Time in the Midst of a Crisis: Prior Informed Consent, Sociability and Vulnerability in Ethnographic Research

The seductive peril of precedent-based decision making

Ethics review and self-censorship (Lisa Wynn)

Is the pre-recruitment of research participants potentially an ethical issue in Australia? (David Hunter)

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

About the Corresponding Author

Gary Allen

Sp-user Link
Gary has worked in the human research ethics field since 1997. He has worked with committees in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and Vietnam
Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in Sp-mail User

About the blog

The senior consultants started AHRECS in 2007. We were looking for a way of responding to requests for advice on research ethics and integrity from the government, health and education sectors read more…

Comment rules

We decided to include comment functionality in the Blog because we want to encourage the Research Integrity and Human Research Ethics communities to contribute to public discourse about resourcing and improving practice. read more…

Related Links

Complaints against Research Ethics Monthly

Request a Takedown

Submission Guidelines

About the Research Ethics Monthly

About subscribing to the Research Ethics Monthly

A smiling group of multi-racial researchers

Random selected image from the AHRECS library. These were all purchased from iStockPhoto. These are images we use in our workshops and Dr Allen used in the GUREM.

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in