2010 Research Retreat

Summary

Thanks to Joan Stevenson and her students, the 2010 Center of Research Expertise for Prevention of Muculoskeletal Disorders (CRE-MSD) Research Retreat at Queen’s University was a great success. The evening panel on June 8 was made up of Pierre Bilodeau from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Robert Walker from the Department of Defence, Sylvia Rhodes, president of L. Ritchie Cartage, and CRE-MSD’s associate director in research, Jack Callaghan. Due to time constraints, only the first two gave presentations. The strong call to action from Robert Walker was that researchers need to reframe their relationship with government so they are not only coming to government for money. This has led to government regarding researchers as yet another interest group that needs money. If researchers came to government to help solve government’s problems by offering solutions (and we need some money to get you there), there would be a major shift in the dialogue between academia and government.

Without doubt, the highlight of the evening was when all four of the panellists came forward to answer questions from the audience. Some of the questions were pretty challenging, such as how can researchers persuade government to fund long-term longitudinal studies when their perspective is only four years long, and others were on the experience of researchers collaborating with industry and industry collaborating with researchers

About 40 researchers and their students attended the full-day workshop on June 9. Ten researchers presented their experiences conducting research with industry: Tammy Eger; Dave Andrews; Clark Dickerson; Patrick Neumann; Joan Stevenson; Stu McGill; Phil Bigelow; Syed Naqvi; Ted Haines (presented by his students); and Desre Kramer. Here are some points that were hightlighted:

• Building a relationship is time consuming but essential
• Use this time to define roles and expectations
• You need to find a “passionate partner” amongst the stakeholders who can keep the impetus of the workplace research going
• There is a wide range of methodologies appropriate for workplace health intervention research from randomized control trials to observational case studies, and this choice will determine multiple factors in the research including the kinds of questions you ask, the intervention, and your data collection
• You need to be flexible and responsive to the stakeholders’ needs
• The role of intermediaries such as health and safety associations can be very helpful
• The culture of evidence is very different for researchers and stakeholders; the need for “practical solutions” vs. research
• The workplace environment is so changeable that you do need to have a Plan B which could be some lab research as a backup for students
• You have to make sure that it is a win-win for both researchers and stakeholders
• Young researchers need to make sure that the research you do will enhance your academic career, especially if you are up for tenure