Research

Research is a small two-syllable word that has lots of hidden (and sometimes emotional) depth. It is both a noun and a verb. Yes - I could give you dictionary definitions of both uses but that is not the purpose of this contribution. I could offer you my own definitions of both the noun and the verb usage: this would be arrogant of me to do so. One minor subject I do not want to discuss are the pronunciation issues - I am personally happy with either the UK English or US English pronunciations. I would much rather offer a mixed sample of the type of research that is conducted within the Conservation Department in order to illustrate the research that goes on.

Firstly, I would like to spend a short time considering the noun usage of the word research. Yes, I did look up several dictionaries in preparation for writing. The majority of them used a verb to describe the noun. For me, the practical use of the noun describes the output of the action of research. It is the presentation of the findings of the work. Such presentations may be verbal such as a conference presentation, written (as a paper in a learned journal) or as a CD-ROM. Of course there are many other outputs and the audience largely determines these. If one wishes to cross the professional structures then it is often efficient to talk as this enables a dialogue to develop. Whereas, if the audience are ones professional peers then publication in an appropriate learned journal can be appropriate. Often, there are multiple audiences and several or combined methods of communication are employed. Within the Conservation Department research output is communicated on many different levels; from local intra-Department symposia, through specific and targeted meetings via professional sub groups through to international conferences. What is interesting to me to note is the general lack of attention in presenting these research findings to the public. Most research output tends to be 'behind the scenes' and with little public presentation. The recently published Departmental Annual Report focuses greatly on the output and it is gratifying to see a continued presentation of the research output to public audiences through such events as gallery talks, school visits, public lectures etc. Should we (and other teams in conservation) do more? Should these events be given a higher priority?

Now I would like to adjust the focus to the verb usage of the word research. In the V&A we are fortunate to have many areas in the organisation that support research. This varies from the Research Department that provides output relating to the collections, the Education Department that is very much involved with the delivery of the public output, the Collection Services Division that researches imaging processes, data collection techniques and conservation related matters. The V&A undertakes a great deal of research at a variety of different disciplines and levels.

An often-asked question that I hear is 'How do I do research?'

My eyes roll upwards at such a question, I take a deep in take of air and then implode! We all 'do' research. It is nothing magical or mystical. If you want to buy a new car or a new washing machine, very few of us part with our hard earned cash on the first item we see. We generally put some parameters to our needs (how many seats for the car or how fast does the spinner work in the washing machine?). So we are defining and refining our needs and attempting to match those needs with the best on the market. I am sure that we are all very similar - in that the first item that meets our needs is far in excess of our budget (oh yes, that is another item that generally gets pre-defined - the budget). Then comes the compromise or decision-making phase that goes something like:

How much?

It does not do everything I require!

It is too expensive!

It will not fit in the space or garage!

The delivery time is too long!

These (and many other) factors are balanced up before making the purchase.

How do we determine that we need the item of research? This can come from many different levels and is determined by the complexity or scale of the task. At the biggest end of the scale, look at organisational strategic plans. All large heritage organisations produce such plans - usually a requirement of the funding agencies. On a local level, the Jewellery Gallery at the V&A is an excellent example of strategic planning influencing the actions. The V&A is committed to the re-display and study of its collection of jewels. Inevitably, in writing catalogues and other learned papers there is a need for factual information. In deriving this factual information there are many other uses that the same (or very similar) information can be put to. There are the requirements of the researcher in their own skill sets (gemmologist, metallurgist, analyst). So from a simple desire to re-display a gallery there are many parts. Yes, these plans may be one sentence 'wish' lists but they give an excellent view of organisation needs and often the research needs fall directly from these. The skill is identifying those areas of research that help support or deliver the strategic plan. Alternatively, the needs may be determined by the requirement to improve a technique or process (such as a new and less interventive conservation process) - this is a much more local requirement. In all but the smallest of research areas there will be a need to secure the resources to undertake the research.This requires negotiation skills along with skills of presentation.

To re-cap, you now have the basic premise for the research and you have secured the resources required to undertake it. Now is the time to do the work! However, the verb research now translates into the noun research - the need to publish or tell others about the outcome.

The scale of research has little to do with process - this remains a constant. What is a valuable approach is to consider the quality of research. This has two essential aspects that require assessment - technical audit and resource audit are the key tools for performance. But this still leaves an assessment of quality. I have not yet encountered a totally sturdy approach for this. The Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) that takes place in academia is perhaps the most robust. The basis of these and all other 'quality' assessments is some form of peer review. Sometimes this can take years. There is no substitute in this quality assessment for experience.

It does not matter if the research is cross-national borders or local one day a week - the processes and the approach remain constant. Develop the premise for the research, test it in theory, undertake the practical work to test the variables, evaluate these (and this could go on for several cycles) and publish the outcomes is the basis for all research. We can all undertake research.