Overview
Institutions invest in research capacity for many reasons: new research-intensive strategies, accreditation expectations on faculty scholarship, doctoral program growth or a push for external funding. The common challenge is that staff arrive with very different starting points — some have never designed a study since their own doctorate, others need specific advanced methods — so generic training either bores or loses people.
We start with a needs analysis (a short survey plus conversations with research leaders) and design a modular program: a common core in research design and ethics, then tracks such as quantitative analysis, qualitative methods, systematic reviews or grant writing. Each module includes practical work on participants' own research questions or data.
Programs can run as intensive on-site weeks, spaced online series or blended formats, and can be delivered by us or co-delivered with your research office so local capacity grows. We measure what matters to you — proposals submitted, ethics applications approved, manuscripts completed — not just satisfaction scores.
Who it’s for and the problems it solves
This is for you if you are…
- Research offices and vice-rectors for research planning staff development
- Faculties with many staff who teach heavily and have limited recent research experience
- Doctoral schools training supervisors and research students together
- Research institutes and hospitals building clinical or applied research skills
- Ministries, donors and networks funding research capacity across several institutions
Common problems we help with
- Faculty want to publish but lack up-to-date methods or analysis skills
- Training has been ad hoc, with little link to research strategy
- Proposals to funders are few and often return with methodological criticism
- Doctoral supervision quality varies widely across departments
- There is no internal pipeline from idea to ethics approval to publication
What’s included — and what isn’t
Included
- Training needs analysis: staff survey, interviews with research leaders and review of research output patterns
- Program design with learning outcomes, sequencing, tracks and participant selection criteria
- Core modules: research design, research questions and theory, literature searching and review, research ethics and data management
- Methods tracks: quantitative analysis in SPSS, R or Stata; qualitative analysis with NVivo, ATLAS.ti or MAXQDA; mixed methods; systematic and scoping reviews
- Funding and dissemination modules: proposal writing, journal selection, open science practices
- Applied project work with feedback on participants' own proposals, instruments or datasets
- Supervisor development sessions for doctoral supervisors
- Train-the-trainer component so your staff can run modules in future
- Evaluation plan tracking outputs over six to twelve months
Not included
- Conducting participants' research or writing their papers for them
- Promising publication, funding or ranking improvements
- Acting as co-author unless a separate, genuine research collaboration is agreed with authorship criteria
What you receive
- Needs analysis report
- Findings on staff skills, confidence and priorities, with a recommended program structure.
- Program design document
- Outcomes, modules, schedule, delivery format, participant criteria and evaluation plan.
- Training materials
- Slides, exercises, datasets, templates and reading lists, licensed for internal reuse.
- Participant project feedback
- Written feedback on proposals, instruments or analysis plans developed during the program.
- Evaluation report
- Participation, learning and output measures, with recommendations for the next cycle.
How it works
Discovery
Meet research leadership, review strategy and output data, agree goals and constraints.
Needs analysis
Survey and interviews to profile skills and priorities; results shared with leadership.
Design
We propose modules, tracks, formats and schedule; you validate and select participants.
Delivery
Workshops, clinics and project feedback, on-site, online or blended.
Follow-up and evaluation
Mentoring or clinics after the program, then an evaluation of outputs and a handover to your research office.
Program design approaches
- Needs-based design
- Self-assessed skills combined with output data and leadership priorities to decide what to teach and to whom.
- Project-based learning
- Participants bring a real research idea or dataset and leave with a concrete output such as a proposal or analysis plan.
- Spaced delivery
- Shorter sessions over weeks with tasks in between, which usually improves application compared with a single intensive block.
- Train-the-trainer
- Co-delivery with selected local staff, who receive facilitator guides and observe before leading.
- Kirkpatrick-style evaluation
- Reaction, learning, behavior and results levels, adapted to research outputs.
A sample program structure
A typical academic-year program might run a two-day kickoff on research design and ethics, then monthly half-day workshops by track, fortnightly online clinics and a final showcase where participants present proposals or manuscripts to research leadership. Structures are adapted to teaching calendars and to how much time staff can realistically protect.
- Core: design, theory, literature, ethics, data management
- Tracks: quantitative, qualitative, reviews, grants
- Clinics: one-to-one or small-group feedback on live projects
- Showcase: internal presentations and peer feedback
Why protected time matters more than content
The strongest predictor of whether training becomes output is whether participants have time to apply it. We raise this with leadership at the design stage and suggest light-touch options — reduced teaching for a semester, writing days, small seed grants tied to completion — that institutions can choose from.
What the work can look like
Illustrative example — fictional data
Illustrative excerpt: program outcome summary
A fictional mid-sized university ran a nine-month program for 30 faculty across three tracks. Figures are invented to show the evaluation format.
Participation
26 of 30 participants completed at least 80% of sessions. Completion was lowest in the quantitative track, where participants cited teaching peaks in weeks 8–10.
Outputs at 12 months
14 ethics applications submitted, 9 manuscripts submitted to journals, 4 external grant proposals submitted. Outcomes of submissions were outside the program's control and are tracked separately.
Recommendation
Shift quantitative sessions away from mid-semester and add two writing days per term for participants with near-complete manuscripts.
Illustrative example with invented numbers, not a real client result.
What you’ll need to provide
- Research strategy and priority areas
- Basic data on staff profile and research output
- Venue and equipment for on-site delivery, or an online platform
- Software licenses for participants where needed (for example SPSS or NVivo)
- Commitment of participants' time, ideally protected from teaching
You don’t need everything ready to ask for a quote — tell us what you have and we’ll say what’s missing.
What affects price and turnaround
Price depends on
- Number of participants, modules and tracks
- Delivery format (on-site, online or blended) and travel requirements
- Amount of individual project feedback and mentoring
- Whether train-the-trainer and materials licensing are included
- Evaluation depth and follow-up period
Turnaround depends on
- Academic calendar and when staff can attend
- Time needed for needs analysis and participant selection before delivery
Every project is quoted individually. How we price our work.
Questions people ask before starting
Can the program be delivered in languages other than English?
Core delivery is in English. Bilingual materials or co-delivery with local facilitators can be arranged; tell us your language needs at the scoping stage.
Do participants get certificates?
We can issue certificates of participation or completion describing the hours and content. Accredited credits depend on your institution's or a partner's approval processes.
Will this increase our publications?
Training can increase proposals, submissions and quality, but acceptance depends on journals, reviewers and the research itself. We track outputs such as submissions and help you interpret them honestly.
Can you help with a specific method we need, such as systematic reviews or SEM?
Yes. Tracks can be built around specific methods, and we can include software-based practical sessions. For individual learners outside an institutional program, our training pillar offers courses too.
How do you handle participants' unpublished data?
Participants' data and drafts are used only for feedback within the program, handled under confidentiality terms, and never reused or shared.