Civil servants use research in different ways

Kari-Elisabeth Vambeseth Skogen has researched how Norwegian civil servants use research in their daily work.

Skogen has been concerned with the gap between academic thinking and practical administration since she started working at the Ministry of Education and Research in 2013.

As a new employee, she lacked training in how to find, assess, and use research.

Many questions swirled in her mind: ‘How should I carry out my bureaucratic role well and work in a research-based way? How do we actually do this as a civil service? How should I navigate?’

“I did not know enough about where to look for research-based knowledge, or how to assess its quality and relevance. It seemed there were quite a few different practices,” says Skogen.

She has now confirmed several of her initial assumptions through her doctoral research.

Aware of their responsibility

Skogen’s research is based on an extensive review of relevant literature.

She also conducted a survey in which more than 1,600 civil servants from all but one ministry responded, as well as in-depth interviews with 23 people in 3 ministries.

“Civil servants in Norwegian ministries, regardless of their level, report that using research is important in their daily work,” says Skogen.

Her impression is that civil servants are aware of their responsibility. They know that what the state, ministries, and government decide has major direct impacts on us as individuals and on society as a whole.

"There's a seriousness here"

“So what politicians base their decisions on matters a great deal. There's a seriousness here that we who work in the civil service are very conscious of,” says Skogen.

However, her research reveals that many civil servants have their own individual habits and practices when it comes to using research in their work.

The interviews also showed that staff had different strategies when they did not get immediate access to the relevant research they were looking for. 

Some settled for searching for something else, others found alternative routes and links, and some went through the library for help. 

Others contacted the researcher behind the study directly to gain access. Those who gave up quickly often did not know what alternatives were available.

"Talk too little to each other"

Skogen was surprised that civil servants could sit close to colleagues with more expertise in using research, without there being any system in place for transferring this competence.

“There are also differences in which criteria individuals apply when they assess quality and relevance. While those with research experience more often draw on scientific criteria, others without similar experience may focus more on whether data are new or close in context,” she says.

The findings also showed that there is relatively little to learn from colleagues.

“Everyone does as well as they can or tries their best. But we talk too little to each other,” says Skogen.

Many contribute to the final document

Her research also revealed that individual practices can have their advantages.

“Complementary practices can mean that, together, we gain access to more sources and a broad knowledge base. The ministries also never rely on a single input. They are hierarchical institutions, and documents must pass through many layers and be refined before they are finalised,” says Skogen.

She emphasises that the end result – the recommendations, documents, and knowledge bases that are produced through this way of working – is usually thorough and robust. 

Skogen's research also shows how the different documents produced build on one another.

It became increasingly clear to Skogen that it's difficult to measure the direct effect of such research. 

“Research creeps in from various sources into different documents and accumulates over time together with other types of knowledge. Meaning that research is used, but rarely in a way that allows you to point out and say that this specific piece of research led to that specific policy change,” she says.

Time pressure can be a problem for quality assurance

Another trend was that Skogen’s informants reported increasing time pressure in recent years.

“At times, the media set the agenda and demand rapid responses from the minister and the civil service. Parliament also requests a lot of answers,” says Skogen.

Much of the work in ministries is devoted to providing these responses.

What worried her informants was what this time pressure might mean for the quality of reports and knowledge bases produced by the civil service.

She questions whether urgent requests may cause long-term important work that does not appear urgent to be deprioritised, and whether the stockpile of knowledge may fail to grow.

“If that is where we end up, over time we will also be less able to respond adequately to urgent commissions,” says Skogen.

Balancing insider status with an outside perspective

As an ‘insider’, Skogen has had unique access to informants and to the culture in the ministries. At the same time, she has worked to maintain the proper distance required as a researcher.

“The dual role has largely been an advantage, not least the direct access to many informants and the opportunity for observation. The fact that I am very familiar with bureaucratic language has probably also been beneficial,” says Skogen.

“And my strategy – precisely that I am an ‘insider’ – has been to describe the situation as it is, to find out how research is used, and not to point out mistakes,” she adds.

However, she emphasises that based on her findings, she does propose improvements.

Suggestions for improvements

Some suggestions include more information sharing, better training for new employees, and more predictable routines for the use and accessibility of research.

Among other things, she proposes:

1. That time be set aside to work on long-term analytical tasks that are not urgent, because this is crucial for the ability to respond to demanding urgent inquiries.
2. More effective systems for storing and retrieving documents.
3. That civil servants are curious and more openly discuss and share experiences with each other about how they search for, assess, and use research.
4. More training.

Reference:

Skogen, K.V. Using Research: Perspectives from inside policy organisations (Abstract), Doctoral dissertation at the University of Oslo, 2026.

———

Read the Norwegian version of this article on forskning.no

This content is paid for and presented by the University of Oslo

This content is created by the University of Oslo's communication staff, who use this platform to communicate science and share results from research with the public. The University of Oslo is one of more than 80 owners of ScienceNorway.no. Read more here.

More content from the University of Oslo:

• 

  Drones may soon fill our city skies, warns researcher

• 

  Democracy researcher: The monarchy's days are not yet numbered

• 

  Infidelity isn’t just about sex: Couples therapist has one piece of advice she often gives

• 

  The police fear spirals of violence among youth

• 

  "All warning lights are flashing red" – but a democracy researcher believes the US can turn things around

• 

  Older people are more sexually active than most people think