Innovations and new project ideas often emerge in networks of researchers, users of research, and societal actors. This article analyzes and discusses how research scientists learn to conduct research that has an impact on their clients, scientific community, and society. We describe a new developmental impact evaluation method based on the theory of expansive learning. The pilot process was conducted for bioenergy researchers at MTT Agrifood Research Finland. Developmental impact evaluation offers networks a process for evaluating completed projects, learning from them, and constructing a new research concept via pilot projects. The method opens up the concept of ‘research impact’ as a qualitative learning challenge, rather than an accountable target to be judged. It may be adopted as a continuous way of managing and renewing cross-disciplinary research programs, research groups, or networks.
Argyris, C. ( 1999). On organizational learning (2nd ed.). Cornwall, ON: Blackwell .
2.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Balthasar, A., & Rieder, S. ( 2000). Learning from evaluations: Effects of the evaluation of the Swiss energy 2000 programme. Evaluation, 6, 245-260.
4.
Bapuji, H., & Crossan, M. ( 2004). From questions to answers: Reviewing organizational learning research. Management Learning, 35, 397-417.
5.
Bateson, G. ( 1972). Steps to ecology of mind. New York, NY: Ballantine.
6.
Buchanan, D.A., & Fitzgerald, L. (2007). The best practices puzzle: Why are new methods contained and not spread? In D. A. Buchanan, L. Fitzgerald, & D. Ketley (Eds.), The sustainability and spread of organizational change (pp. 41-59). London, England: Routledge.
7.
Cavaleri, S., & Fearon, D. ( 2000). Integrating organizational learning and business praxis: A case for intelligent project management. The Learning Organization , 5, 251-258.
8.
Coryn, C.L.S., Hattie, J.A., Scriven, M., & Hartmann, D.J. (2007). Models and mechanisms for evaluating government-funded research: An international comparison. American Journal of Evaluation, 28, 437-457.
9.
Cousins, J.B., & Earl, L.M. ( 1992). The case for participatory evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 397-418.
10.
Crossan, M., Lane, H., & White, R. ( 1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. The Academy of Management Review, 24, 522-537.
11.
Dart, J., & Davies, R. ( 2003). A dialogical, story-based evaluation tool: The most significant change technique. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 137-155.
12.
Donovan, C. ( 2008). The Australian research quality framework: A live experiment in capturing the social, economic, environmental, and cultural returns of publicly funded research. In C. L. S. Coryn & M. Scriven (Eds.), Reforming the evaluation of research. New directions for evaluation, No. 118(pp. 47-60). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
13.
Easterby-Smith, M. ( 1997). Disciplines of organizational learning: Contributions and critiques. Human Relations, 50, 1085-1113.
14.
Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. ( 2000). Organizational learning: Debates past, present and future . Journal of Management Studies, 37, 783-796.
15.
Engeström, R. ( 1999). Imagine the world you want to live in: A study on developmental change in doctor-patient interaction. Outlines, 1, 33-50.
16.
Engeström, Y. ( 1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Jyväskylä, Finland: Orienta-konsultit.
17.
Engeström, Y. ( 1994). The working health center project: Materializing zones of proximal development in a network of organizational innovation. In M. Lahtonen (Ed.), Action research in Finland. Helsinki, Finland: Ministry of Labour.
18.
Engeström, Y. ( 2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133-156.
19.
Engeström, Y. ( 2004). New forms of learning in co-configuration work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16, 11-21.
Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. ( 1996). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Engeström, Y., Virkkunen, J., Helle, M., Pihlaja, J., & Poikela, R. ( 1996). The change laboratory as a tool for transforming work . Lifelong Learning in Europe, 2, 10-17.
23.
Fetterman, D. ( 2001). The transformation of evaluation into a collaboration: A vision of evaluation in the 21st century. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 381-385.
24.
Fiol, M.C., & Lyles, M.A. ( 1985). Organizational learning. The Academy of Management Review, 10, 803-813.
25.
Friedman, V.J. ( 2001). Designed blindness: An action science perspective on program theory evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation , 22, 161-181.
26.
Floyd, S., & Wooldridge, B. (1994). Dinosaurs or dynamos? Recognizing middle management’s strategic role. Academy of Management Executive, 8, 47-57.
27.
Floyd, S., & Wooldridge, B. (1997). Middle management’s strategic influence and organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies, 34, 465-485.
Gherardini, S., Nicolini, D., & Odella, F. ( 1998). Toward a social understanding of how people learn in organizations: The notion of situated curriculum. Management Learning, 29, 273-297.
30.
Gibb, J. ( 1968). Defensive communication. In W. Bennis, E. Schein, S. Fred, & D. Berlew (Eds.), Interpersonal dynamics: Essays and readings on human interaction (pp. 606-612). Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
31.
Greene, J.C. ( 1997). Participatory evaluation. Advances in Program Evaluation, 3, 171-189.
Halonen, M., Kallio, K., & Saari, E. ( 2010). Towards co-creation of service research projects: A method for learning in networks. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2, 128-145.
34.
Hamel, G., & Green, B. ( 2007). The future of management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
35.
Jääskeläinen, V. (2007). Biopolttoaine noruu tankkeihin [Biofuel is trickling into tanks]. Pirkka, 1-2, 96-97 [In Finnish].
36.
Kallio, K. ( 2008). Tutkimusorganisaation oppiminen kehittävän vaikuttavuusarvioinnin prosessissa: osallistujien, johdon ja menetelmän kehittäjän käsityksiä prosessin aikaansaamasta oppimisesta. [Developmental impact evaluation process enhancing learning in a research organization: Perspectives of the participants, management and developer of the process]. VTT Publications 681. Espoo: VTT [in Finnish].
37.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. ( 1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Lehesvirta, T. ( 2004). Learning processes in a work organization: From individual to collective and/or vice versa? Journal of Workplace Learning , 16, 92-100.
39.
Lyall, C., Bruce, A., Firn, J., Firn, M., & Tait, J. ( 2004). Assessing end-use relevance of public sector research organizations. Research Policy, 33, 73-87.
40.
Lyles, M.A., & Easterby-Smith, M. (2003). Organizational learning and knowledge management: Agendas for future research. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds.), Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management (pp. 639-652). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
41.
Lähteenmäki-Smith, K. , Hyytinen, K., Kutinlahti, P., & Konttinen , J. (2006). Research with an impact: Evaluation practises in public research organizations . VTT Research Notes, 2336, Espoo .
42.
Marquardt, M.J., Leonard, S., Freedman, A.M., & Hill, C.C. ( 2009). Action learning for developing leaders and organizations. Principles, strategies, and cases. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
43.
Mezirov, J. ( 1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46, 158-173.
44.
Nonaka, I., von Krogh, G., & Voelpel, S. ( 2006). Organizational knowledge creation theory: Evolutionary paths and future. Organization Studies, 27, 1179-1208.
45.
Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. ( 2001). Re-thinking science. knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. UKPolity Press and Blackwell.
46.
Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2010). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557-576.
Patton, M.Q. ( 1997). Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context. Evaluation Practice, 18, 147-163.
49.
Patton, M.Q. ( 2010). Developmental evaluation. Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York, NY: Guilford.
50.
Rogers, J.D. ( 2008). Evaluation in R&D management and knowledge use: A knowledge value mapping approach to currency accessible to the visually impaired . Research Evaluation, 17, 237-249.
51.
Saari, E. ( 2003). The pulse of change in research work. A study of learning and development in a research group. Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki University Press.
52.
Saari, E., & Talja, H. ( 2009). Towards communication and learning based leadership. Observations in Finnish public research organizations. The Learning Organization, 16, 251-260.
53.
Star, S.L. ( 1995). Ecologies of knowledge. Albany, NY : State University of New York Press.
54.
Torres, R., & Preskill, H. ( 2001). Evaluation and organizational learning: Past, present and future. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 387-395.
55.
Yli-Kovero, K. ( 2007). Rypsidieselin teko maatilalla maksaa yli 70 senttiä litralta. [Production of turnip rape diesel in farms costs over 70 cents per litre]. Helsingin Sanomat, June 14 [In Finnish].
56.
Van de Ven, A. ( 2000). Professional science for a professional school. Action science and normal science. In B. Michael & N. Nitin (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (pp. 393-413). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
57.
Vygotsky, L.S. ( 1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, England: Harvard University Press.
