2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/150330
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Satisfying and stressful experiences of first-time grantees
Abstract:
Satisfying and stressful experiences of first-time grantees
Conference Sponsor:Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Year:1991
Author:O'Brien, Mary, PhD
P.I. Institution Name:Catholic University of America
Title:Professor of Nursing
As nurse researchers increasingly seek and secure external funding

for their research, more will need preparation for the

nonscientific, administrative realities of conducting a funded

project. A review of literature found abundant literature on the

management of scientific problems but only two older reports on

nonscientific, administrative, aspects of research. Neither dealt

with large studies or with the administration of funded projects,

and neither identified the satisfactions that attend successful

project administration. In order to help faculty, administrators,

and research directors facilitate the progress of new or newly

funded investigators, a descriptive survey of first-time federal

grantees (nurses employed by schools of nursing) supported by the

NIH National Center for Nursing Research (NCNR) from 1983 to 1987

was conducted. The research questions were: 1) What do principal

investigators (PIs) identify as satisfying and stressful

experiences associated with the nonscientific or administrative

aspects of the first federally funded research study?, and 2) Based

on those experiences, what information would be helpful in

facilitating the progress of new grantees? Descriptions of

satisfying and stressful experiences associated with the first

federally funded project were collected using Fox and Diamond's

recommendations for obtaining useful incidents about satisfying and

stressful experiences in a given context. 86 incidents were

received from 34 investigators, 77 percent of the 44 believed to be

eligible. The investigators independently read and classified the

incidents by theme and category and agreed on a mutually

satisfactory taxonomy, which was then confirmed by an external

panel of investigators. Four categories of satisfaction

(Personal-Social, Material-Career, Impact on School and University,

Clinical) and seven categories of stressful experiences (Budget,

Personnel, Equipment, Access to Subjects, Fatigue, Inadequate

Administrative Support, and the Grant Cycle Itself) were

identified. Four conclusions were supported: 1) The incidents

supported a sense of both general generalizeability and

comprehensiveness across respondents; 2) The tone of the whole data

set was overwhelmingly positive; 3) One-third of the satisfactions

identified were benefits to the school of nursing, university,

clinical site, and the profession itself; and 4) Many of the

stressful experiences were preventable or fixable with education or

consultation. The most helpful information for new grantees would

be orientation to institutional personnel, purchasing, and

accounting policies and anticipatory guidance about the kinds of

supervision that a research team will need. Other suggestions for

educating colleagues about the demands of funded research and

easing access to clinical sites are made.



Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Sigma Theta Tau International

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleSatisfying and stressful experiences of first-time granteesen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/150330-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Satisfying and stressful experiences of first-time grantees</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Sigma Theta Tau International</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">1991</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">O'Brien, Mary, PhD</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Catholic University of America</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Professor of Nursing</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">As nurse researchers increasingly seek and secure external funding<br/><br/>for their research, more will need preparation for the<br/><br/>nonscientific, administrative realities of conducting a funded<br/><br/>project. A review of literature found abundant literature on the<br/><br/>management of scientific problems but only two older reports on<br/><br/>nonscientific, administrative, aspects of research. Neither dealt<br/><br/>with large studies or with the administration of funded projects,<br/><br/>and neither identified the satisfactions that attend successful<br/><br/>project administration. In order to help faculty, administrators,<br/><br/>and research directors facilitate the progress of new or newly<br/><br/>funded investigators, a descriptive survey of first-time federal<br/><br/>grantees (nurses employed by schools of nursing) supported by the<br/><br/>NIH National Center for Nursing Research (NCNR) from 1983 to 1987<br/><br/>was conducted. The research questions were: 1) What do principal<br/><br/>investigators (PIs) identify as satisfying and stressful<br/><br/>experiences associated with the nonscientific or administrative<br/><br/>aspects of the first federally funded research study?, and 2) Based<br/><br/>on those experiences, what information would be helpful in<br/><br/>facilitating the progress of new grantees? Descriptions of<br/><br/>satisfying and stressful experiences associated with the first<br/><br/>federally funded project were collected using Fox and Diamond's<br/><br/>recommendations for obtaining useful incidents about satisfying and<br/><br/>stressful experiences in a given context. 86 incidents were<br/><br/>received from 34 investigators, 77 percent of the 44 believed to be<br/><br/>eligible. The investigators independently read and classified the<br/><br/>incidents by theme and category and agreed on a mutually<br/><br/>satisfactory taxonomy, which was then confirmed by an external<br/><br/>panel of investigators. Four categories of satisfaction<br/><br/>(Personal-Social, Material-Career, Impact on School and University,<br/><br/>Clinical) and seven categories of stressful experiences (Budget,<br/><br/>Personnel, Equipment, Access to Subjects, Fatigue, Inadequate<br/><br/>Administrative Support, and the Grant Cycle Itself) were<br/><br/>identified. Four conclusions were supported: 1) The incidents<br/><br/>supported a sense of both general generalizeability and<br/><br/>comprehensiveness across respondents; 2) The tone of the whole data<br/><br/>set was overwhelmingly positive; 3) One-third of the satisfactions<br/><br/>identified were benefits to the school of nursing, university,<br/><br/>clinical site, and the profession itself; and 4) Many of the<br/><br/>stressful experiences were preventable or fixable with education or<br/><br/>consultation. The most helpful information for new grantees would<br/><br/>be orientation to institutional personnel, purchasing, and<br/><br/>accounting policies and anticipatory guidance about the kinds of<br/><br/>supervision that a research team will need. Other suggestions for<br/><br/>educating colleagues about the demands of funded research and<br/><br/>easing access to clinical sites are made.<br/><br/><br/><br/></td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T10:21:51Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T10:21:51Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipSigma Theta Tau Internationalen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.