Developing the Model of Researchers Satisfaction with Research Management System: A Case Study in a Military Medical University

Document Type : Original Research

Authors

Health Management Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background and Aim: Investigating the dimensions and components of research management satisfaction can identify appropriate executive solutions for the qualitative and quantitative enhancement of research projects. The purpose of the present study was to provide an appropriate theoretical and practical framework for evaluating satisfaction with research management and its application for evaluating researchers' satisfaction in a selected military medical university.
Methods: The present study was an applied study in terms of purpose and was a mixed qualitative-quantitative study in terms of methodology. In the first step, the main dimensions and components of researchers' satisfaction with research management extracted using literature review and expert opinion survey. In the second step, a structured questionnaire designed and standardized to measure the satisfaction of researchers in each of these dimensions. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to assess the content validity of the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha used to assess questionnaire reliability. Finally, the questionnaire distributed randomly among 150 researchers and faculty members of a military medical university. The relationship between satisfaction with demographic and occupational characteristics of the respondents evaluated by ANOVA at SPSS-16 software.
Results: Six dimensions and 15 components were identified to measure satisfaction with the research management system. The main dimensions of measuring satisfaction with research management included research leadership, capacity building, creating hope, organizational communication, research organization, and resource allocation. The highest satisfaction was related to creating hope (2.71±0.82) and the least satisfaction was related to resource allocation (1.79±0.31). There was no statistically significant relationship between demographic and occupational variables of respondents and satisfaction with research management (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Given that the least satisfaction of the researchers were in two dimensions of resource allocation and capacity building, it is recommended that research managers pay more attention to equitable distribution of resources in addition to creating new resources and developing financial and non-financial research capacities simultaneously.

Keywords

References

1. Yamini M. Academic Development Planning. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University; 2004. 2. Amin Sarami N. Pathology research in Dafos. Danesh-e-Entezami. 2008;10(1):79-98. 3. Hoyle RH, Harris MJ, Judd CM. Research methods in social relations. Japan: CBS publishing; 2002. 4. MESSMER PR. Why do faculty members get tenure? The deans' perspective. Nurse Educator. 1991;16(3):23-5. doi:10.1097/00006223-199105000-00010 5. Amiri MM, Nasiri T, Saadat SH, Anabad HA, Ardakan PM. Measuring Efficiency of Knowledge Production in Health Research Centers Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA): A Case Study in Iran. Electronic physician. 2016;8(11):3266. doi:10.19082/3266 6. Nieswiadomy RM. Foundations of nursing research: Appleton, Lange Stamford, CT; 1998. 7. Hefferin EA, Horsley JA, Ventura MR. Promoting research-based nursing: the nurse administrator's role. The Journal of nursing administration. 1982;12(5):34. doi:10.1097/00005110-198205000-00009 8. Barriers of Research Performances in the View of Nurses. HBI_Journals. 2007;15(2):7-13. 9. Boyt TE, Lusch RF, Naylor G. The role of professionalism in determining job satisfaction in professional services: A study of marketing researchers. Journal of Service Research. 2001;3(4):321-30. doi:10.1177/109467050134005 10. Bahadori M, Raadabadi M, Teymourzadeh E, Yaghoubi M. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Herzberg job motivation model for workers in the military health organizations of Iran. 2015. 11. van der Weijden I, Teelken C, de Boer M, Drost M. Career satisfaction of postdoctoral researchers in relation to their expectations for the future. Higher Education. 2016;72(1):25-40. doi:10.1007/s10734-015-9936-0 12. Rosser VJ. Faculty members' intentions to leave: A national study on their worklife and satisfaction. Research in higher education. 2004;45(3):285-309. doi:10.1023/B:RIHE.0000019591.74425.f1 13. Schrodt P, Cawyer CS, Sanders R. An examination of academic mentoring behaviors and new faculty members' satisfaction with socialization and tenure and promotion processes. Communication Education. 2003;52(1):17-29. doi:10.1080/03634520302461 14. Farzaneh E, Amani F, Molavi Taleghani Y, Fathi A, Kahnamouei-aghdam F, Fatthzadeh-Ardalan G. Research barriers from the viewpoint of faculty members and students of Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Iran, 2014. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2017;4(6):1926-32. doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20161735 15. Mehralizadeh S, Vakili A, Pourhoseini S. View of academics of faculty of medicine of Semnan university of medical sciences towards student research. Medical Education and Development. 2012;6(1):11-6. 16. Fazlolahi S. Factors Affecting Student Research. Islam and Educational Research. 2012;4(165-184). 17. Makial Agha B. Barriers and facilitators of research universities to provide practical guidelines for the promotion of research at the University. Journal of Modern Thoughts in Education. 2007;2 (3):101-10. 18. Bahadori M, Tavana AM, Momeni K, Yaghoubi M, Teymourzadeh E, Alimohammadzadeh K. Evaluation of Research System in a Medical Sciences University. Journal of Health Policy and Sustainable Health. 2014;1(3). 19. Aleman A, Denys D. Mental health: a road map for suicide research and prevention. Nature News. 2014;509 (7501): 421. doi:10.1038/509421a 20. Segalman DJ, Paez T, Smallwood D, Sumali A, Urbina A. Status and integrated road-map for joints modeling research. Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM. 2003. doi:10.2172/809623 21. Yaghoubi M, Javadi M, Bahadori M, Ravangard R. Health promoting hospitals model in Iran. Iranian journal of public health. 2016;45(3):362. 22. Zohor A, Fekri A. Barriers to Research from the Viewpoints of Faculty Members of Iran University of Medical Sciences. Payesh. 2003;2(2):113-20. 23. Tress G, Tress B, Fry G. Analysis of the barriers to integration in landscape research projects. Land use policy. 2007;24(2):374-85. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2006.05.001 24. Winter R, Sarros J. The academic work environment in Australian universities: a motivating place to work? Higher Education Research , Development. 2002;21(3):241-58. doi:10.1080/0729436022000020751 25. Ashrafirizi H, Soleymani M, Hashemian M. Economic Barriers of Health Researches in Iran: A Narrative Review Article. 2018. 26. Abbaspour G. Assessing the Implementation of the Government's Supportive Policies in Favor of Knowledge-Based Companies (A Case study: Fars, Razavi Khorasan, Gilan & Hormozgan Provinces). Journal of Public Administration. 2017;9(3):403-26. 27. Badrizadeh a, Gholami y, Birjandi m, Beiranvand g, Mahooti f. Barriers to research from viewpoint of faculty members of Lorestan university of medical sciences. Yafteh. 2009;11(3):93-100. 28. Mansourian M, Nematbakhsh M. Research outcomes evaluation for university academic members: One suggestion for research grant. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2017;17:239-41. 29. Mohammadi F. The Effect of Faculty Members' Performance Evaluation with Smart Record on Improving Their Performance. Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences. 2010;1(1):5-22. 30. Wullt J. R&D Expenditure in the EU27 stable at 1.85% of GDP in 2007. Science and Technology and Innovation in Europe [Internet]. 2009. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat.
Journal of Military Medicine
Volume 22, Issue 7 - Serial Number 92
September and October 2020
Pages 708-718

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics