Practitioner research: Exploring issues in relation to research capacity-building

Abstract

Lack of funding for research capacity-building in nursing and allied health research has been a long-standing issue (Rafferty et al., 2002; Scott, 2002). More recently, limited moneys have been made available in the form of doctoral and post-doctoral awards from the Health Foundation and the Department of Health, largely to prepare nurses and allied health professionals for a career in research. However, little attention has been given to the capacity-building required for practitioners who may now have research as a core component of their work: nurse consultants and research and development nurses working in NHS and primary care trusts, for example. These practitioner researchers tend not to have previously benefited from the luxury of full-time funding and have learnt their research skills through higher education courses — Master's or part-time PhDs — or 'on the job' experience. This paper reports findings of a three-year study, the CELEC [Central and East London Education Consortium (now the North East London Workforce development Confederation)] Action Research Project: Care for Older People, that focused on the development and evaluation of seven lead R&D nurses: Care for Older People. These posts were appointed at Whitley Council (Nurse) Grade I or Research and Analogous Staff Grade II, depending on whether the lead R&D nurses preferred their contract to be with the NHS or the university. It was anticipated that the project might prepare some practitioners for a future role as nurse consultants. The paper reflects on the lessons learnt from this project, in particular the lead R&D nurses' education and support needs. Although findings mainly relate to their work as action researchers, they are likely to be of wide interest given that nurse consultants are expected to engage in this form of practice development. Action research is concerned with improving practice. It seeks to do research with and for people, rather than research on them (Meyer, 2000). It is thus ideally suited for practitioners who may, in addition to their role in research, also have responsibility for developing services. The findings may also be of interest to lecturer practitioners, who might choose to use action research as a means of facilitating work-based learning.