Kateryna Kryzhanivska is a PhD candidate at LUT University in Finland and a co-lead of the Special Interest Group – Frontiers of Impact within global ISPIM innovation community, which connects members from research, industry, consulting, public sector, passionate about innovation management. With this blog, she contributes to the ongoing discussions on how PhD students and early-career researchers can create impact from research to solve grand societal challenges and how science can inform regional policymaking.
“The route to good theory leads not through gaps in the literature but through an engagement with problems in the world that you find personally interesting” (Kilduff, 2006, p.252).

Source: picture generated by AI (DALL·E 3)
Policymakers in Europe increasingly recognize the value of science for policymaking…
I will start with an open discussion about the role of science in policymaking to address grand societal challenges, such as pandemics, climate change and geopolitical conflicts that unfold on global and regional levels.
The COVID-19 pandemic has been a stark reminder of the value science can bring to society in general, e.g., through the accelerated production of vaccines. Let’s also not forget how #Fridays4Future called upon governments to listen to scientists, underlining the public demand for more science in policy. By providing insights to governments and the public, science has been a key to helping design more effective policies.
And policymakers have indeed started listening. For instance, when it comes to organizational responses to climate change, research shows that the transition to digital, green, and sustainable technologies can lead to reduced carbon emissions. Policymakers have been actively incorporating these research findings into the regulations that promote responsible and inclusive technology development and regional growth, ensuring that innovation aligns with sustainable development goals.
Given this close interconnection between science and policy, the European Commission has recently published a Staff Working Document on recommendations how to connect better the scientific research with policymaking. This provides new avenues for researchers to make an impact. Also, just two months ago, the EU-27 research ministers – in the form of Council Conclusions of the Council of the EU – concluded about the impact of research and innovation (R&I) in policymaking that we need to work towards creating a European science-for-policy ecosystem.
…but what does it imply for early-career researchers like me?
What can I do with all these initiatives as an early-career researcher? How would I, with my research, fit into this emerging science-for-policy ecosystem?
While pursuing my PhD, I have always been interested in the real-world impact of science. How can I make a positive impact through research? How can science inform better policymaking and practice to shape our sustainable and innovation-driven future? To find answers to these questions, I reflect on my research journey in this #Science4Policy blog post and share how researchers can actively inform policymakers to make timely and relevant decisions informed by evidence through scientific facts, empirical insights, and future research agendas.
Getting involved via “engaged scholarship”
One answer to these questions lies in practices of “engaged scholarship”. Engaged scholarship, or the so-called diamond model, developed by a famous management scholar, Andy Van de Ven (2007), explains how researchers can engage practitioners and policymakers to study a complex societal problem in four iterative steps. This helped me understand how my research can have direct impact on the regional level and address societal challenges.
With the genuine interest in researching new forms of organizing collaboration with the aim of fostering innovation changes at regional level in the context of digitalization, I formulated initially the following research question: how does inter-organizational collaboration evolve in regional networks and how is it shaped through digitalization? This research interest connected me with the European Regional Development Fund’s project with the sustainability network “Greenreality” in the South-Karelia region of Finland.
So, how did I practice “engaged scholarship” in the context of this project? Next, I walk through the key steps with examples from my research.
Step 1 – problem formulation (with the regional network and policymakers)
The problem that I was trying to understand is how regional networks can collaborate across organizational, network, and regional boundaries by leveraging digitalization. Existing theory could not explain this problem well, and I formulated and clarified it through discussions between our research group, regional network, and regional policymakers. The regional stakeholders' main interest was in practices of how digitalization could facilitate inter-organizational collaboration processes for regional growth, innovation, and internationalization of local companies.
Step 2 – theory building (in reflection on practice)
Development of scientific explanations in the case of my research required an iterative engagement not only between the empirical data and the literature, but also with the scientific communities and practice. I actively discussed my research at the conferences, webinars, tested research ideas with regional policymakers by sharing first-hand evidence that could benefit the region. While exploring the phenomenon of inter-organizational collaboration in regional networks, jointly with the research group and local SMEs (small and medium enterprises), we also studied the new forms of organizing collaboration on digital platforms and were motivated to design research cases that will help regional companies internationalize.
Step 3 – research design (action research within the regional context)
I engaged in action research, which builds on iterative action and reflection on the research process with regional network members and policymakers. Gathering preliminary insights, ideas, and feedback were essential in this process. The iterative nature of research helped me to facilitate collaboration with the regional network members across all stages of the research project. How was this done? — I piloted experimental cases of temporary organizing for digital internationalization, where Greenreality network members shared an innovation problem that had to be solved fast and required engagement of multiple experts. For example, how can a startup company find new customers and market opportunities through a digital community platform? I could closely follow the actions and document collaborative solution development.
Beyond practice-oriented company cases, I also conducted research interviews with the key stakeholders of the Greenreality network, and then engaged with the data analysis. Meanwhile, at the beginning of 2020, the hit of the Covid-19 pandemic significantly disrupted the activities and work practices of regional networks. Accelerated digitalization provided another opportunity to collect and analyze additional data from the studied regional network and map the patterns of change in inter-organizational collaboration dynamics.
Step 4 – problem solving (translating research findings)
The final step deals with the question: How should researchers interpret their research findings? Beyond the academic outputs, researchers should work collaboratively with stakeholders to develop practical solutions and policy recommendations. This may include pilot projects, policy proposals, or development and capacity building programs. Feedback from stakeholders and the outcomes of implemented solutions should inform further research. Hence, engaged scholarship is an iterative process across the four steps.
Through feedback from policy and practice we can ensure that the research remains relevant and impactful. To facilitate research translation, I asked one of the key regional stakeholders of Greenreality network to provide feedback on my research findings. Our discussion generated further ideas how the identified dynamic collaboration patterns and resilient practices could be considered in RDI policies when designing a new regional strategy for the next years. Also, regional policymakers encouraged me to share the learnings from my research with other regions within the NextGenerationEU recovery plan, which aims to make European regions more resilient and fit for future challenges.
As this four-step approach shows, science of relevance for policy does not often follow a linear approach—creating (artificial) boundaries between the scientific community and policymaking world, but it is rather a co-creation process. For an early-career researcher, this “engaged scholarship” approach is incredibly enriching and motivating, as well as helps me acquire relevant, transferable skills for policy engagement and stakeholder management before the final research outputs get published in the scientific journals.
Connecting “engaged scholarship” with European policies and projects
Following the governance principles of science for policy and open science recommended by the European Commission, researchers must be inclusive, transparent, and open in communicating their research for societal benefit. Open science means open communication of scientific results in various forms, such as policy briefs, reports, infographics, interactive online tools, and short video summaries alongside traditional academic publications.
Throughout the research project, I used different forms of open science communication strategy to create impact. First, together with the research group, we developed Greenreality Network Project Report that included practical examples and success cases of leveraging different digital collaboration practices in the regional network. Second, I participated in large-scale European community events, such as EYE (European Youth Event), which happens once in two years, bringing young people across disciplines, organizations, and countries together to share knowledge and discuss the future of Europe with the policymakers.
As an early-career researcher, I have also had an opportunity to deepen my understanding of impact through participation in several summer schools on research impact organized by EU Horizon 2020 project – OpenInnoTrain, where a group of researchers actively shares practices of impact through research, such as, e.g., scoping emerging research contexts, stakeholder engagement, communicating research outputs and real-world outcomes. These practices shaped my PhD journey and helped me to communicate science for regional policy impact.
Moreover, OpenInnoTrain is an excellent showcase of how a global network of researchers and industry practitioners across Europe and Australia creates impact through translation of research between university-industry cooperation and open innovation. Supporting such R&I networks with European funding instruments is also an opportunity for policymakers to connect with European and global talent, learn from scientific best practices and innovations, and leverage this knowledge for societal and policy impact.
In conclusion, this research journey taught me that passion for global or local challenges and opportunities within our communities are the drivers of meaningful societal change. As I move forward with the research, I stay curious and committed to engage in solving complex and wicked problems in the world. This resonates with my vision as an early-career scholar to make a positive difference and discover future impact through the European science-for-policy ecosystem.
Login (or register) to follow this conversation, and get a Public Profile to add a comment (see Help).
06 Feb 2024