The “invisible” engines of research

“The Amazon rainforest has reached a tipping point.” This was the headline of a BBC News article published a few years ago, based on a scientific study published in Nature Climate Change. The article, which warned of a loss of resilience due to the wide variety of damage and pressures to which the Amazon Rainforest was being subjected, quoted only the lead researcher.

However, behind that result, there are almost always many more people and organisations: research teams, technical staff, support offices, project management professionals, people working in the field, social actors, and collaborating organisations… A complex network of contributions without which the research would hardly exist, let alone have any impact. 

And yet, many of these contributions remain largely unseen.

In today’s scientific system, both academic and social recognition continue to focus largely on specific outputs: publications, visible leadership roles, or final results, whilst many other tasks remain off the radar. For example: 

• technical and experimental work,
• project and funding management,
• facilitating collaborations,
• science communication and knowledge mobilisation,
• long-term engagement with societal and institutional stakeholders. 

These activities are not just part of the research process; they are often the essential conditions for achieving an impact. They facilitate co-creation and the use of knowledge, as well as creating partnerships and helping to sustain them over time. Yet they largely remain invisible.

To bring all these “other” contributions to light, the Hidden REF movement emerged in the UK in 2019, driven by the scientific community itself as a critical response to its official research assessment system, the Research Excellence Framework (REF). The Hidden REF, which currently operates only in the UK, functions as a parallel initiative that collects and recognises the invisible contributions to research through qualitative narratives, highlighting what traditional evaluation systems tend to overlook: invisible roles, collective contributions, or everyday practices that underpin research and enable its impact. 

The underlying idea is simple yet powerful: “If we don’t recognise all the work that is vital to research, then we harm our ability to conduct research.”, as explained by one of the individuals recognised in the report from the latest edition of Hidden REF.

In a context where evaluation systems are evolving, with initiatives such as DORA and CoARA, towards broader, more qualitative models, and where the relevance and social value of research are beginning to play an increasingly important role, the Hidden REF acts as a mirror, and as an exercise in collective honesty that challenges us: what are we leaving out when we define what counts as excellence, and who deserves to be considered excellent?

One of the most notable proposals from the Hidden REF movement is the “5% Manifesto”. This document calls on UK institutions to ensure that at least five per cent of the results they submit in official evaluations relate to “Non-Traditional Outputs (NTOs)”. These are outputs resulting from other ways of producing and sharing knowledge, often more focused on practical application or engagement with society, which traditional evaluation systems have so far recognised very little, or not at all.

It is particularly interesting that, when these outcomes are included in official evaluations, they tend to receive very high ratings. This suggests that there is still some way to go in recognising them and giving them the value they deserve in the day-to-day practice of research and its evaluation. In this sense, the Manifesto represents a first step towards demonstrating that excellent science can take many forms. 

If we understand impact – as we have been suggesting in the various “Corners” – as a dynamic, relational process that is often complex and sustained over time, it is difficult to conceive of it without considering all the people who make it possible. Support offices, management staff and specialists in communication, knowledge transfer or impact, as well as many other professional roles, act as vital links between research and society. They facilitate co-creation, help to identify needs, create spaces for interaction, and ensure that knowledge is useful and used.

Several initiatives are emerging internationally to recognise, professionalise and raise the profile of research management and support careers. These include PRISM (Professional Research Investment and Strategy Managers) in the UK, EARMA (European Association of Research Managers and Administrators) across Europe and the European Commission's RM Comp (European Competence Framework for Research Managers). All of them focus on the people who manage and make research possible.

Recognising these roles is of fundamental importance: without them, research risks becoming further away from the reality it seeks to transform.

Recognising those who are not on the front line and broadening our perspective on what we mean by “contribution” does not weaken research, on the contrary, it makes it more robust, more collaborative, and more connected to society.

Initiatives such as the Hidden REF demonstrate that highlighting these contributions increases people’s sense of belonging, promotes more collaborative and respectful working cultures, and helps to improve both the quality and relevance of research.

Rethinking and reflecting on impact helps us not only to ask what value and benefits research brings to society, but also who helps make this possible, and whom we are recognising for it. 

To learn more

• The Hidden REF White Paper
• INORMS Research Evaluation Group - SCOPE & More than our rank
• European Association of Research Managers and Administrators – EARMA
• European Competence Framework for Research Managers – RM Comp