Over the past 20 years, there is a growing trend in higher-education to better understand, evaluate and maximise the impact being made in context (Adam et al., 2018). Though such efforts are indeed worthwhile, various barriers have been faced by higher-education with respect to achieving these goals – arguably, the most common barrier being issues regarding how best to evaluate/assess impact, perhaps, because such impact strategies are poorly understood (Reed et al., 2022). However, it is reasonable to suggest that such efforts to evaluate/assess impact face difficulty because of the issue of operational definition – how one assesses ‘impact’ needs to match how impact is defined/conceptualised. Thus, a better understanding of academic impact is key.

Barriers to conceptualising impact

The nature of impact has been difficult to conceptualise. For example, early efforts to establish impact frameworks typically focused on impact as research contribution that makes a social or economic impact – external to academia (see Commonwealth of Australia, 2005; Penfield et al., 2014; Sousa & Brennan, 2014). Such approaches are problematic in two important ways.

First, in addition to impact external to academia, it is argued that higher-education should also exhibit value of and promote impacts within academia. For example, research impacts teaching (i.e. research-informed teaching), teaching informs research (e.g. how to conduct research and research supervision), teaching impacts teaching (e.g. teacher education) and research impacts research (e.g. where research represents stepping stones in the chain of knowledge that leads to future, further-informed research). Simply, it can be said that ‘impact starts at home’ – an important impact being the creation of capability and accessibility within an institution to make further impacts. Notably, this is not to say that higher-education institutes do not do this already; however, such activities need to be incorporated into academic impact frameworks to enhance understanding of impact and broaden the scope of opportunities for staff and students to make meaningful impact.

Second, regarding problems associated with conceptualising impact as research contribution solely (as is often the case), such extant frameworks significantly narrow what and who can be impactful with little to no rationale. Of course, research can be of great impact; but so too can teaching and non-research engagement with people and organisations external to higher-education. This is particularly important to consider upon acknowledgement that no two higher-education institutes (HEIs), or even HEI sectors, are the same and, importantly, have their own specific missions, values, cultures and outputs. With that, HEIs whose core focuses are on teaching and traineeships or regional service engagement (beyond that of research) should not be viewed as less impactful than those with greater focus on research. There are different types of academic impact and developing frameworks need to incorporate such broader perspectives. In light of these considerations and consistent with previous research (Dwyer & Seery, 2024; 2025), impact is referred to in the current study as:

“the demonstrable, positive influence (i.e. direct or secondary) of teaching and learning, research (or research equivalent activities) and service engagement – endeavoured for the purpose of sustainable transformation – in the arenas of: society; economy; technology; culture; the environment; health; policy; quality of life; as well as teaching and research, in their own right” (see, also, Table 1).

Table 1: Three impact typologies (Dwyer & Seery, 2024)

The Irish Technological University sector

Over the past seven years (and less in most cases), Ireland has seen the establishment and development of five technological universities (TUs), in light of consortia of their former institutes of technology (IoTs). TU focus is placed on preparing students for complex professional roles in a changing technological world; advancing knowledge through research and scholarship; and disseminating this knowledge to meet the needs of society and enterprise; all while paying particular regard to the needs of the institution’s home region (HEA, 2012). With respect to the Irish HEI landscape, a TU represents a combination of the university system (perhaps most notably, focus on both the administration of National Framework of Qualifications ^[1] [NFQ] level 7-10 courses and academic research) and the tradition of IoTs from which TUs were born – that being one focused on career-oriented education at NFQ levels 6 through 8 and research focused in industry settings (Dept. of Education and Skills, 2011). As a TU, such scope has broadened in order to facilitate this ‘combinatory perspective’ – occupying a niche in higher education in Ireland, through building on the achievements of their antecedent IoTs and upholding such institutional values, while also complementing the work of other Irish universities, such as through designation of awarding power at level 10 NFQ (i.e. doctorates). For example, in addition to extending educational focus beyond levels 6-8 through to 9 and 10, TUs are also facilitating access and progression regarding further education, training and apprenticeships. Arguably, this broadened scope might be the TU characteristic that most distinguishes itself from other sectors of higher-education – that being its ‘connectedness’ – rooted in its regional endeavours, brokering knowledge and skills between the local community and both national and international needs, policy, education and research (TURN, 2019).

Each of the five recently established TUs have an exciting opportunity to create their own unique identities within the Irish higher-education landscape (Dwyer & Seery, 2024; 2025). Such establishment also coincides with the development and administration of Ireland’s Impact 2030 initiative, which is based on five pillars of focus: (1) research and innovation on our economy, society and the environment; (2) research and innovation structures on excellence and outcomes; (3) innovation on enterprise success; (4) talent at the centre of the research and innovation ecosystem; and (5) research and innovation on Ireland’s all-island, EU and global connectivity. At the core of these five pillars, the focus on impact is clear.

While it is not necessary for TUs to emulate existing universities or even IoTs (i.e. TUs will use these models as starting blocks and, subsequently, distinguish the TU sector from other HEIs in Ireland [TURN, 2019]; e.g. based on credibility, recognition and “lifting capacity and performance to meet the challenges of the regional, national and global knowledge economies” [Marginson, 2011]), it remains that many indicators and extant metrics for capturing impact, as part of Impact 2030, are inherited from the traditional university system. This is problematic not only because it makes TUs emulate traditional universities (with respect to impact), but also because TUs are distinct from such HEIs with respect to their mission, values, culture and outputs – all of which will affect how impact is thought of, created, captured and reported.

Study context

One such recently established TU, the Technological University of the Shannon (TUS), has developed a mission and declared its telos in an effort to help facilitate the establishment of its unique identity in the Irish HEI landscape. Perhaps more important, this mission (as presented in the current Strategic Plan) also indicates the type of impact TUS will have – not only in the arena of higher education, but in broader contexts, influencing all walks of life:

‘TUS provides leading student-centred higher education that is research-informed, regionally-relevant and accessible to all… Our vision is to be a catalyst for sustainable change through education and research that transforms lives, our region and the world beyond.’

However, with this mission statement is acknowledgement that impact requires additional consideration and elaboration, to ensure deep understanding of specific impacts that are being made and how they can be captured in a meaningful way. Thus, a series of studies were designed to, first, develop detailed understanding of what impact means at TUS and how that translates across the Irish TU sector. In light of the development of a TU relevant framework for impact, qualitative research was conducted with heads of department and other TUS function heads to explore themes surrounding impact at the departmental level (Dwyer & Seery, 2024). A list of 157 impact indicators and evidence types were identified as were the emergence of five core themes (i.e. the importance of TUS identity to impact; student-centredness as TUS’s ‘bread-and-butter’; alumni as an impact; the importance of interdisciplinarity; and the distinct nature of research conducted at TUS), all of which were found to be strongly influenced by effective communication. Changing focus from staff to students, the next study examined transformative learning as impact (e.g. see Casey, 2018; Dirkx, 1998; Mezirow, 2000), with results revealing that 77% of 1,232 current and past TUS students surveyed had experienced some form of transformative learning and that 37% of those surveyed experienced ‘explicit transformative learning’ – both of which being significantly more than those who did not report such experience.

Focus of the next study – the current research – is placed on the modelling of perceptions regarding influences of impact of both TUS higher-management and the external stakeholders associated with TUS’s service engagement. The rationale is that, while the first two studies focused on data sourced from internal staff and students, in terms of engaging activities that are impactful, the current research will examine perspectives of those more closely engaged with the policies and guidelines that facilitate such impact, as   well as opportunities to engage and translate impact external to the microcosm of academia, particularly to that of TUS-specific culture. Specifically, this research aims to shed further light on the nature of impact in the Irish TU sector through identifying and modelling influences to impact in TUS, from the perspectives of TUS higher-management and external stakeholders, with respect to both barriers and facilitating influences, through interactive management (IM). This research will further inform impact framework development and make recommendations for future methods of identifying and capturing TU impact in a meaningful, accessible manner.