Embedded Researchers

Embedded Researchers

Skill sets for systems-oriented research

Start

Introduction

index

The role

Skills

Supporting the role

Suggestions

For more information

The sipher consortium

systems science in public health and health economics research (SIPHER)

SIPHER was an innovative systems science programme exploring the complex real world relationships and interdependencies of diverse policies that shape our health and wellbeing. A core element of the work was bringing policy and research together to address complex health challenges. Embedded Researchers (ERs) were critical to this mission. Our insights on ER work in a systems science consortium are summarised here, drawing from the accounts of ERs and those of others involved in SIPHER.

the role

working in sipher

ERs were policy people first

Embedded Researchers were recruited to support relationships between policy and research.

SIPHER ERs were recruited to policy organisations, not research organisations

They spanned three geographies - local, regional and national. Sheffield City Council, Greater Manchester Combined Authority, the Scottish Government and Public Health Scotland all had Embedded Researchers during SIPHER.

The contexts were different

Local, regional and national ER roles had different needs and profiles to suit their setting

None of the ERs had been ERs before

Although all had a background and interest in research

Each ER had their own specialism

ERs had different research backgrounds e.g. public health, operational research and social geography

Working patterns differed

For example, some worked on SIPHER fulltime, some part time, some job shared

skills and personal characteristics

meeting needs

SIPHER Embedded Researchers had specialist skills. These were some of their unifying characteristics.

Motivation

Connecting and brokering

Technical capacity

supporting the role

infrastructure is needed to support embedded researchers

As a complex role in complex system science, several support mechanisms were noted in SIPHER

organisational enablers

risk management

Having organisational support enabled SIPHER Embedded Researchers do to their jobs well

There are many things to be watchful of when bringing ER roles into an organisation

ideas on how to improve chances of success

what does the sipher experience tell us?

Through SIPHER, we have learnt that some things might make the role easier to fulfil

Peer support

role scope

tailored cpd

organisational support

Build a network of ERs and/or create mentoring opportunites

Be clear about boundaries of the role and how/where it fits

ERs may benefit from bespoke CPD that reflects their speciality

Make sure ERs are well supported

for more information

for a full evaluation of sipher

Links of interest

Such, E and Brewster, B. (2025), SIPHER Learning and Evaluation 2019-2025.

SIPHER website

SIPHER products

Blog by a SIPHER ER

Evaluation webinar

Organisational enablers

• An organisation that considers systems approaches strategically useful

• A role scaled to match that of the organisations embedded within – e.g. national government requires more than one ER per project. Seniority and juniority may also need to reflect the pattern of the organisation (e.g. flatter hierarchies may allow for more junior roles to engage with people across an organisation)
• Institutional recognition that ER work is difficult
• Confluence in their role description with existing organisational codes of practice and expected behaviours

Embedded Researchers have:

• Sufficient licence to act
• Sufficient seniority to self-direct and connect with senior people in an organisation, preferably all organisations in the collaboration
• 'Permission’ to work in an embedded way between two different organisations
• Political and/or senior buy in to the systems-oriented approach
• A data and research driven culture in their policy organisation

Managing risks

Embedded roles are challenging to navigate. When undertaking a role, managers and ERs themselves need to be alert to:

• Who provides direction (Is work expected to be self-directed. If not, from where does direction come?)
• Lines of accountability and 'command' (e.g. To whom does an ER report? To which organisation or leader?)
• What is the expected leadership role
• What is the expected legacy role e.g. will ERs be expected to carry outputs beyond the funded period?

• Loneliness
• Motivation – self driven work can be high burden
• If/how to ‘sell’ the work – are they are researcher, a knowledge broker or have a promotion function?
• Over-promising what projects can do, especially if ERs are not in control of outputs
• Split roles – sharing time between an ER role and others runs the risk of more urgent operational work gaining precedence
• Over-expansive roles – expectations may exceed capacity

Motivation

• ERs demonstrated energy and drive
• They cared for the work
• They liked the challenge of systems thinking and working with different systems science methods
• ERs wanted to bring disciplines and professions together to address complex challenges

Technical capacity

• ERs were comfortable with quantitative and qualitative elements of systems science; although they were not required to be expert in everything
• ERs understood how to integrate or triangulate methods to bring evidence closer to policy
• ERs understood the tenets of different modelling approaches

Opened doors to/for policy and research

• ERs could network and meaningfully engage across the analytical and policy functions of government
• ERs understood the policy landscape
• ERs looked for/were alert to opportunities to collaborate

• ERs were expert in framing issues and interactions that ‘landed’ well in the policy context (e.g. identified who should be ‘in the room’ and helped frame conversations between researchers & policy)