Does research activity happen in cycles?

In the world of economics, a business cycle refers to the natural fluctuations in economic activity over time, characterised by periods of expansion and contraction (see figure below). These cycles reflect the rise and fall of economic output, employment, income, and spending in an economy.

The cyclical nature of expansion or growth is not just confined to business and economics, it also applies to human growth and development and other biological systems.

This leads me to wonder whether research and academia are also cyclical, with a similar ebb and flow of activity, progress, and output.

While academic research doesn’t follow exactly the same patterns as a business or economic cycle, it can still experience phases of growth, peak activity, slowdowns, and recovery, which could be considered a research cycle.

Here’s how the concept of a cycle might apply to research:

1. Expansion Phase (Growth)

This phase could represent periods of growth and high productivity in research:

• Increased funding and resources: Researchers secure grants or institutional support, allowing them to expand their teams, acquire new technology, and pursue larger projects.
• High output: During this phase, there might be a surge in publications, conference presentations, or patents as research projects come to fruition.
• Growing collaboration: Expansion often involves building new partnerships, both within academia and with industry, government, or other stakeholders.

This phase is characterised by increasing activity, optimism, and momentum in research progress.

2. Peak Phase

At the peak, research activity might be at its highest:

• Intensive research: Discoveries or breakthroughs in knowledge creation are made, and researchers might be working at full capacity to complete projects.
• Recognition and dissemination: Researchers publish widely, receive awards, or present their findings at conferences.
• Maximised impact: Projects are often highly visible, and their findings influence policies, technologies, or further scientific inquiry.

However, this phase may also bring high pressure and stress due to the demands of maintaining a high level of output and performance. There is also reduced time and opportunity for planning and preparation of new projects.

3. Contraction Phase (Slowdown)

Just like in business cycles, research output might slow during a contraction phase, due to:

• Funding constraints: Grants may run out, and securing new funding may become challenging. This can limit research activities.
• Project completion: Major projects come to a close, and the time needed to plan or initiate new research can slow down output.
• Fatigue: After periods of intensive research or work, researchers may need time to recover or refocus, leading to reduced productivity.
• Changes in focus: Shifts in research trends, priorities, or funding focus can cause some fields to slow down while others pick up.

This phase is often a time for reflection, retooling, or repositioning for future growth. It’s really important to be aware of when this phase occurs and feel confident that this is a natural part of the research cycle.

4. Trough Phase (Low Activity)

This is a period of low research activity, but it sets the stage for future cycles:

• Gap between projects: Researchers may be between projects, either waiting for new funding or developing new research questions and proposals.
• Re-evaluation and preparation: This phase may involve reviewing previous work, rethinking research strategies, or acquiring new skills.
• Collaborative recalibration: Researchers may spend more time networking, attending conferences, or working on smaller side projects in preparation for the next big research push.

This phase is often seen as a time for incubation, where new ideas are formulated, but the visible output may be lower. While it may be tempting to feel disheartened, the cycle will naturally rebound, and preparation here enables future productivity.

Recognising where research teams are in a research cycle helps in several ways:

1) Strategic planning: Researchers and institutions can anticipate periods of low funding or slower output and plan for sustainable growth.

2) Wellbeing: Acknowledging that not all periods can be high productivity helps reduce stress and allows for rest, recovery, and rejuvenation.

3) Sustainable productivity: Managing the research cycle helps avoid burnout and ensures more consistent long-term output rather than bursts of overwork followed by exhaustion.

4) Adaptation to external conditions: Funding agencies, academic institutions, and governments often have their own cycles, which affect research output. Being aware of these patterns can help researchers align their efforts with funding availability, policy changes, or technological advancements.

Just as in business, the concept of cycles is useful in research and academia because it acknowledges that progress is not linear. By understanding the cyclical nature of research—highs of productivity followed by periods of slowdown or transition—researchers can manage resources, expectations, and personal wellbeing. Recognising and planning for these cycles allows for more sustainable and long-term research success.

So, where is your team at in the research cycle?