DOING RESEARCH ON COMMISSION:

THEORY & PRACTICE

@ DR DREWMIKHAEL
 POLL:
https://strawpoll.com/6wjya81pp

DRAGON’S DEN (ME)

I. INTRODUCTION: OUTLINING COMMISSIONED
WORK

• What is commissioned research?

• Importance of commissioned research.
• Why should you think about engaging in
commissioned research.
 II. COMMISSIONED WORK: SELLING OUT?

• Tension between critical engagement versus problem-solving

• Replication of neo-liberal logic?
• Worse yet….Neo-colonialism?
• Funding drives most research agendas. But where do these
agendas come from?
• Ethical to be paid?
• Timelines leave little for inductive musings.
III. COMMISSIONED WORK: MAKING A DIFFERENCE?
▪Policy impact across a nexus of issues through different
means.
▪Programme impact can result in effective changes
▪Use of skills to research and provide open access knowledge.
▪Collaboration with variety of actors with wide skillset.
▪Access to wide variety of different groups and case studies.
▪Development of bank of contacts in interesting places
 STRADDLING THE LINE: CRITICAL YET USEFUL
▪ Critical research providing actionable information direct to source

▪ Understanding and situating the research, the commissioning agent,

the donor, their interactions with beneficiaries.

▪ Lexicons that are used? Who are they for?

▪ ‘Really critical friend’. Doing better rather than ‘do gooders’

▪ Focusing on building collaborative research with grassroots actors

▪ Translation of ‘academicese’ to suit commissioners.

 IV. PRACTICING THE CRITICAL SKILLS

• Understanding your positionality.

• The commissioning agent’s positionality.

• More than just extraction? The wider anglo-focus of

development & research

• Needing the money versus believing in the work. Establishing

contracting, managing expectations and managing your own
boundaries
 THE FOLLOWING SLIDES WILL BE
DISCUSSED LIVE DURING LECTURE.

FEEL FREE TO LOOK THROUGH THEM

 DON’T RULE YOURSELF OUT
Case study knowledge is important, but academic ability to analyse, generalise and
to summarise can work across different cases when you use conceptual
frameworks that can be applied broadly.
Work across a nexus in my experience:
• MENA (Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Jordan, Tunisia), South Sudan, Burundi, DRC,
Myanmar & Nigeria
Issues/topics we work on:
• Critical approaches to PVE/CVE
• Ex-combatants in conflict transformation
• Youth inclusion
• Refugees/IDPs
• Conflict management
 PREPPING YOURSELF TO WORK
Number 1 complaint from commissioners about working with academics?
Not understanding them!

Dense, inaccessible and with little connection to the work done by commissioners, academic
collaborators miss the mark.

But academic problematization gives us an ability to identify and frame issues that is very useful:
Seeing the patterns.
AVOID JARGON: NORMATIVE LINGUISTIC INTERACTIONS
ONLY PLEASE!
Being able to explain methodology so that it is still rigorous.
To write data into findings in plain language, explaining key concepts clearly.
Presenting the data in presentations without falling back into jargon.
Some academics find particularly difficult is the writing of recommendations.

Know the audience! Speak to them in their terms

COLLABORATION:
Develop relationships, not only researcher-participant but active partners in research.
• Design the methods, the data collection, reading drafts, asking for feedback.
• Understand the processes of the organisation you are working within to fit their
definitions.
• You will often be asked to do things you might not have direct knowledge or
experience, seek help.
• Encourage to think about power-structures in the commissioned research and
how to rebalance that to tackle tutelage, dominant dynamics of power-holders.
GETTING THE FOOT IN THE DOOR: WRITING PROPOSALS
 GRANT-WRITING TIPS
Understand what they want (sometimes they don’t know what they want
an are looking for a framework!)

Think about the focus of your research experience & how it may relate
• What is the topic? Why is it important?
• What are the research questions can be developed to answer the call?
• What are your hypotheses?
• What are your research methods to answer the call? How will you prove what you
want to prove?
• What does the organisation do normally? How will you fit in?
• How will the organisation know that it worked?
 WRITING THE GRANT

• Write a grant for a research project you believe in, that you can stand behind.
• Consider carefully what kind of impact you will make and just as importantly: for whom you
want to make the impact.
• Understand the commissioning agent’s logic, interventions and objectives.

Consider the following:

• Have you presented a compelling argument?
• Is it feasible for the money/time outlined?
BUDGET
BUDGET CONT…
• Prioritise the money for most needy places.
• Write the budget AFTER research plan and have a good idea
of the costs. You can scale down the costs if needed.
• Determine exact value of costs – or as closest as you can get.
Try to get a triangulated number (flights etc) from different
providers.
• DON’T overbudget or underbudget. This can be tricky, so be
honest about how much your time is worth. Factor in time
away and difficulty of project.
 TIMELINE
• Timeline is important as it will help reviewers understand and evaluate your planning and the
feasibility of your project
• Should be explicit and sensible
• Explain the timeframe for your research
• When will you begin and complete each step
• Useful to present a visual version of your timeline
• Gantt charts are recommended:
 DON’T BE THIS PERSON….
Proposals are overlooked for number of reasons, some of the common ones are:
• Do not fulfill/go over the word limit (you can clarify with commissioner via email RECOMMENDED)
• Lack of impact or do not show enough enthusiasm to make an impact
• Did not answer all questions/deliverables of institution/agency
• Lack of new/original ideas, replicates knowledge readily available
• Hypothesis not well-defined
• Too much jargon!
• Methods do not fit with topic
• Research overly ambitious – not realistic
• Timeline not feasible
• Budget not feasible – no value for money
DRAGONS DEN
Break out groups to develop a 2min (max) presentation that answers the call. Think
about the following to help formulate:
• What impact you want your work to have?
• What methods will you employ to research? (Why are they the right methods)
• Can you demonstrate the needed skills?
• Will it be sensitive to the participants?
• Can you maintain a critical lens? (Situate the power imbalances)
 THANK YOU!
Where you stand on commissioned research:
https://strawpoll.com/8v8s1ch3v

If interested in knowing more contact me at: drewmikhael@gmail.com