Research is an important part of the academic landscape. When a university’s reputation is tied to highly impactful developments in a field of its scope, the benefits trickle down from the stakeholders to the students directly. But for the research to be performed, funds must be available to give to the scholar for them to implement the necessary steps without sacrificing quality for lack of money to get the job done.

The importance of obtaining grants in research, therefore, is a point of broad interest in the university setting. With such high competition on a global scale, many institutions execute the requirement of creating grant experts inside the infrastructure of the academy itself. These experts, as well as others who have an interest in obtaining funding for research, use strategies like grant capture targets to increase the likelihood of their application receiving the grants they are applying for. But the use of grant capture targets in the academic landscape is becoming a highly contested and controversial topic.

Global Competition Among Researchers

The competitive academic landscape of academics has continued to become more fierce as standards of expectation are raised. But scholars know that in order to obtain grants and improved recognition in their field and reputation, they must continue to publish work frequently, and that work must be impactful.

How does one perform research and publish work without a funding source to cover their costs? It becomes an increasingly difficult cycle made even more complex by the Digital Era’s ease of global reach that makes certain grants an open target for researchers around the world instead of in a closed, specific area.

The consequences to this problem then become visible in the observation and analysis of research that is readily published. When a scholar needs to publish or risk losing their reputation completely, without funding the results can be poor or misinformative. To this end, science has become a backseat with the importance of capturing grants and other sources of funding a priority over depth and accuracy.

Grants and Grant Capture Targets

Occasionally, a researcher will come across a funding opportunity that is clearcut and simple to apply for. Most of the time, however, grants, private, and federal funding for research experimentation is a complex system of paperwork and evidence that must be navigated carefully because one wrong answer or missed question can start the applicant all over from the beginning.

Some funding agencies even require that most of the work for the research is already completed so that you have documentation and evidence to prove the value of your work before they’ll consider funding you.

Because of the importance of obtaining grants and the difficulty in doing so, there are many self-help resources available for researchers who want to apply right the first time. Strategies such as doing the legwork early, knowing how to approach the grant based on knowing the funding source, and being specific and measurable with your objectives, particularly in your list of expenses, sound logical but can be time-consuming to people who already have too much on their plate. Many decide to consult professional grant writers instead or focus on grant capture targets.

These targets aim for a wide net of grants that might be relevant to a researcher and then, once approved, the research begins, instead of the opposite. This is a controversial method because funders are overloaded with proposals for funding in a demand that is too high for the supply, while many of these proposals are only in queries instead of actual necessity.

The Problem With Grant Capture Targets

When an academic researcher is pressured into completing projects with the consequence of not doing so meaning it could cost them their job, the research can become rushed. These “targets” that require the researcher to “capture grants” are based on negative external influences rather than passion and concern over the topic.

When grant capture is used as the method in which researchers are measured, it’s a high pressure system, particularly since so many grants are approved based on luck of the draw rather than expert peer review due to the high amount of proposals.

Another problem is money-driven. The higher the grant you obtain, the better your reputation in the eyes of your institution. This makes some researchers aim for expensive proposals, even if they are unnecessary. Approved funding for expensive research means less funding for other scholars who are applying.

Arguments for and against grant capture targets in this ever-changing academic landscape have become grounds for controversial debates, with the answer still unresolved.

Everyone Can Agree on Impactio

While grant capture targets and their relevance in the academic landscape are still being contested, one thing remains clear: Scholars need to publish their work, and they need a reputable program to make this part of their job as streamlined as possible. That’s why many experts turn to Impactio to get the job done.

Impactio is an all-in-one platform designed for scholars to take them from start to finish of their research. With Impactio, it’s simple to enter your information into premade templates and turn your citation and publication data into charts, tables, and graphs without a hassle.

When you’re ready, your work can be published as a professional PDF document or web page for quick and compatible transitioning to your publishing medium. Watch your impact as it climbs through Impactio’s citation indicator program and connect with other scholars on the Impactio global network of community members.

Everyone can agree on the importance of Impactio as a way to make the researcher’s job easier.