Blog
August 21, 2026
Research administration is often viewed through the lens of compliance, policies, and regulatory requirements. Many persistent challenges facing research institutions are not caused by regulations themselves, but by communication gaps between those responsible for establishing requirements and those responsible for implementing them.
Central offices, departmental administrators, purchasers, fiscal staff, and principal investigators all play critical roles in the research enterprise, but they often operate with different perspectives, priorities, and pressures. Much like the dynamics explored in previous discussions on PI and research administrator relationships, while principal investigators remain at the center of the research enterprise, the effectiveness of research administration often depends on the relationships between the administrative professionals who support them.
When these differences lead to misunderstanding or misalignment, the result can be frustration, inefficiency, and increased compliance risk. By fostering stronger communication, mutual understanding, and intentional partnerships across all levels of the institution, research administration leaders can reduce friction, improve compliance outcomes, and better support the research mission.
Aligning Goals Across Research Administration Teams
A common source of friction between departments and central offices is the perception that their priorities conflict. Department staff may view central offices as overly focused on compliance and as creating unnecessary obstacles. In turn, central office staff may believe departments do not fully understand regulations and delay meeting key deadlines or deliverables. In research administration, it can be easy to interpret a late submission, missing documentation, or policy violation as a lack of diligence or concern for compliance.
Communicate Shared Objectives
In reality, both groups want the same outcomes: successful research, compliance, responsible stewardship of sponsor funds, and lower audit risk. Communicating these shared goals early and reinforcing them throughout the award lifecycle helps establish common ground and foster a collaborative approach.
Assume Positive Intent
Recognize that competing priorities, misunderstandings, or gaps in information frequently contribute to late submissions, missing documentation, and other compliance issues. Approaching conversations with curiosity helps foster trust, encourages open communication, and creates opportunities to address underlying issues before they recur.
Communicate the Rationale Behind Compliance Decisions
Simply communicating a decision without rationale, such as telling a departmental purchaser “You can’t charge that expense,” provides little context. While technically accurate, this leaves the individual frustrated, confused, and no better equipped to handle a similar situation in the future.
Provide Educational Context
Provide the rationale behind the decision. For example, “Because the purchase occurred outside the project period, charging the expense could create audit risk for both the principal investigator and the institution.”
Create Learning Opportunities
The outcome remains the same, but the educational value is significantly greater. By explaining the “why” behind a decision, central offices transform routine compliance interactions into opportunities for learning.
Reduce Administrative Burden Through Clearer Communication
Over time, this increased understanding can reduce future errors, minimize the need for corrective actions, and lessen administrative burden throughout the life of an award. Effective communication can strengthen compliance by helping stakeholders understand requirements before issues arise.
Invest in the “Hidden Compliance Workforce”
The people most responsible for day-to-day research compliance are often not research administrators. They include departmental administrative staff, purchasers, fiscal officers, lab managers, and executive assistants. While training often focuses on research administrators and compliance professionals, these frontline personnel frequently initiate transactions and support faculty activities before a central office becomes involved.
Extend Education Across Administrative Roles
One of the most overlooked opportunities in research administration is investing in these individuals who operate closest to routine research activities.
Foster Proactive Partnerships
When these personnel understand institutional policies and the reasons behind them, they can identify and prevent issues earlier in the process. By extending education and engagement efforts to these roles, institutions can strengthen compliance, improve efficiency, and better support their research communities.
Replace Transactional Interactions with Strong Partnerships
In many institutions, interactions between central and departmental personnel occur only when something has gone wrong, resulting in relationships formed during moments of stress rather than collaboration. This reactive model tends to reinforce friction on both sides—departments experience central offices as gatekeepers, while central offices can view departments as noncompliant or unresponsive.
Build Interactions Through Ongoing Engagement
Shifting this dynamic requires ongoing partnerships built through regular communication and engagement.
Engage Departments Consistently
When central administrators engage departments early and consistently—through office hours, informal check-ins, or proactive outreach—trust begins to replace defensiveness.
Encourage Early Outreach
When departmental staff feels comfortable reaching out before issues escalate, many common problems can be resolved before they become compliance concerns. Over time, this approach transforms research administration into a collaborative ecosystem where both sides share responsibility.
Design Research Administration Processes That Support Compliance
While compliance is often viewed as a function of policies and oversight, process design plays an equally important role. When compliant actions require navigating complex procedures, locating hard-to-find guidance, or obtaining multiple approvals, even well-intentioned employees may become frustrated or seek workarounds. This is particularly challenging for departmental personnel who manage numerous competing priorities and may not have specialized research administration expertise.
Design the Clear Path to Compliance
Institutions should strive to make compliance the easiest option by providing clear guidance, streamlined processes, and user-friendly tools that support decision-making at the point of action.
Improve the Administrative User Experience
By reducing unnecessary complexity and focusing on practical usability, institutions can improve compliance outcomes while also enhancing the overall user experience for researchers and administrative staff alike.
Create Feedback Loops for Continuous Improvement
Effective communication requires information to flow in multiple directions. While central offices are responsible for providing guidance and oversight, they can miss the practical impact of those directives on the ground.
Leverage Frontline Insights
Departmental personnel often have valuable insights into how policies and procedures function in practice.
Implement Formal and Informal Feedback Channels
Creating feedback channels—such as office hours, user groups, surveys, or advisory committees—allows institutions to identify pain points, clarify misunderstandings, and uncover opportunities for process improvement.
Use Feedback to Improve Research Administration Processes
By actively seeking and incorporating feedback from those closest to the work, research administration leaders can build stronger partnerships, improve service delivery, and develop solutions that are both compliant and operationally effective.
Strengthening Research Administration Through Shared Responsibility
Effective research administration depends on policies, procedures, and oversight mechanisms, and it requires a shared commitment to communication, collaboration, and continuous improvement across the research enterprise. By aligning around common goals, communicating the rationale behind decisions, investing in frontline administrative personnel, building partnerships, simplifying compliant processes, and creating meaningful feedback loops, institutions can strengthen both compliance and service delivery. Ultimately, the most successful research administration programs are those that recognize compliance as a shared responsibility and empower stakeholders at every level to contribute to the success of the research mission.
Attain Partners – Research Administration Experts
Attain Partners brings deep experience in research administration operations, compliance, organizational design, and process improvement across the research enterprise. Our team works with institutions to strengthen administrative structures, clarify processes, and support sustainable research operations.
About the Author
Britt Ingram is a Senior Associate at Attain Partners with over fifteen years of experience in higher education post-award research administration. Prior to joining Attain Partners, Britt spent over a decade at the University of Kentucky holding key financial and grant management positions across the College of Engineering, the College of Medicine, and central research administration. Britt specializes in university research administration and post-award grant management, helping institutions navigate complex federal compliance, reporting requirements, and award oversight.
