Impact case study database

Alongside extensive public dissemination, research findings have been shared continuously with the BBC through regular meetings, advisory boards and user group workshops, transforming practices and perceptions inside the BBC [S1] as well in the wider public sphere [S3].

Changing BBC Practices

Robert Seatter, BBC Head of History, states Hendy and Webb’s research has “made us reflect on our own practice” in oral history . Their representation-oriented selection criteria for choosing their own interviewees led to the BBC evolving “a new set of selection criteria” for its own oral history project [S1] . In 2019-20 Seatter responded specifically to the project by commissioning the creation of new ‘BAME’ and ‘LGBTQ+’ themed collections for the BBC’s future oral history archive. The project’s strategy of making as much of the collection as possible available for public viewing prompted the BBC to introduce “better central governance” and “strategic oversight” of its own oral history archive [S1]. In February 2019 Hendy was invited to Broadcasting House to advise a new team recording the next generation of official BBC oral history interviews on the need to embrace emerging scholarly research themes and techniques – emphasising ‘whole-life’ approaches and the benefits of open access combined with enhanced metadata and security standards [S1]. The BBC’s interviewers “remarked on their increased perception of the professional role and application of the collection, following partnership with Sussex”. Seatter reports that this has led to “more rigour re: storage and encryption” for the BBC’s oral history, and that the inclusion of security information in legal contract letters to potential BBC interviewees has increased confidence in “speaking openly and honestly” [S1]. Finally, the research “provoked” a plan to rename some of the 55 meeting rooms in Broadcasting House, in 2019-20, “to reflect the more diverse personalities from the BBC’s history” [S1].

Changing Perceptions within the BBC

Seatter states that Hendy and Webb’s research has had “a profound impact” within the BBC: their work in People, Nation, Empire ( PNE) (2018) for example is a “revelation” concerning the early appearance of black voices on the BBC [S1]. It provided “useful” input for “DG [Director-General] briefings/speeches, where we are often called upon for historical precedent”, and gave the BBC’s Head of Diversity and Inclusion, Tunde Ogungbesan, “a strengthened narrative and a confidence in articulating a more diverse future for the BBC” (examples of Hendy and Webb’s research were sited in Ogungbesan’s corporate strategy paper) [S1]. The BBC’s newly-established Creative Diversity team were so “bowled over” with PNE and the sense of “a BBC history they had no prior knowledge of” that the Director of Creative Diversity, June Sarpong, consequently decided to integrate PNE material “directly into her strategic presentations to management” [S1]. It also prompted the decision by Creative Diversity to include extra historical sections concerning race on their own website. PNE has since been made accessible, not just as part of 100 Voices, but elsewhere on BBC Online as ‘History of BAME at the BBC’. The changed perceptions among staff are evidenced in the reactions of two prominent BBC figures. The presenter Samira Ahmed said of PNE that learning about Olive Shapley’s work revealed a BBC that did “semi-revolutionary things” even before the war [S2]. The BBC News Correspondent Lyse Doucet said that the World War 2 website “reminds us again and again that even though we remember …Dimbleby… Eisenhower… Churchill… there’s so many ‘Mary Lewis’s’ and others, the technicians, the electricians, the engineers” [S2]. Ahmed and Radio 4 announcer Neil Nunes tweeted threads linked to PNE’s story on Una Marson (the BBC’s first black producer) and the pioneering TV series for immigrants, Make Yourself at Home. Nunes drew attention to the “troubling evidence” of Marson dealing with “racial intolerance from colleagues” [S2]. Sabbiyah Pervez, Communities Reporter for BBC Look North, stated the resource was “much needed” [S2]. Seatter adds that 100 Voices’ “new versions of our corporate history” have been “reflected” in the BBC’s Written Archives Centre, through the naming of a meeting room after Una Marson, whose story was highlighted by Hendy and Webb [S1]. In providing “new perspectives on our corporate evolution”, 100 Voices has given senior staff such as Seatter “a better understanding of how we got to where we are and how that… fitted into a national/international story”. Its “diverse narratives” have “stopped us from being so isolationist” and demonstrated that “there are more ways of seeing than our oft framed one” [S1].

Changing Public Perceptions and Value for Educators

Through PNE, Hendy and Webb’s research altered the perceptions of marginalised communities who previously had felt they had been excluded from BBC history. For example, a ‘key discovery’ – a 1973 Open Door documentary featuring transsexuals – generated coverage in the mainstream and LGBTQ+ press focusing on David Attenborough’s role in commissioning the series. It was then discussed on Twitter by several ‘influencer’ accounts, including LGBT History Month, Trans Media Watch, and ‘ManchParentsGroup’ (a support group for parents of LGBTQ+ children) [S3]. One activist, who runs the Scots Queer International Film Festival, noted the website showed “what progress had been made” but also “saddening” evidence that “there’s still issues today that seem to have made little to no progress” [S3]. One response referred to the research as “A real tangible record of our history” and another (Leanne Troye) tweeted that the archival material was “a real historical eye opener” [S3]. The BBC estimated the immediate response to coverage of the research (especially in the LGBTQ+ press) included tweets with “a total reach of 2.47m” [S4]. It also drew attention to the ‘hidden’ history of the BBC’s struggle to reflect and report on Britain’s multicultural identity. Threads tweeted by ‘Black British Bulletin’ drew their followers’ attention to the website’s material on Marson and Make Yourself at Home [S3]. Comments from a British Library event showcasing the research included: “loads today was new to me! I didn’t know about the first female BBC black producer”; “It is a bit of hidden history”; “I think it is going to be a very valuable resource… particularly for someone like my husband who didn’t grow up here…” [S5].

The research has also had an impact on education and curricula development. History teachers at Aylesbury High School tweeted that it was “an amazing resource” for their “migration to Britain unit and a huge help as we rewrite diversity into our KS3 curriculum” [S6]. The Royal Historical Society report on Race, Ethnicity & Equality in UK History: a Report and Resource for Change, recommended PNE as one of the key “Primary source guides and datasets that illuminate BME histories” [S7].

Changing Institutional Practice at the British Library

For the British Library (BL), Sisterhood and After has been an unalloyed success. As [text removed for publication] at the BL argues, the richness and variety of the research “is a great means of encouraging our users to explore a range of our collections and it creates new entry points for library users thereby widening engagement across a broader range of our collections than otherwise might happen” [S1]. For [text removed for publication], this fits precisely with the BL’s corporate strategy of building capacity as a research organisation. He also notes that Jolly’s project has now become “a great example of how productive collaborations can work” and has been deployed as a model to support staff development at the BL [S1].

The success of the S&A research has been deeply significant in determining the direction of the BL as well as in the allocation of its resources. The “accumulated impressive user figures” [S4, S6, S11] noted by Rob Perk, Lead Curator and Director of National Life Stories (BL), are part of the way that “the project impacts on popular historical understandings of the period as well as the history of gender relations” [S4]. But as well as impacting on perceptions it has led to more material changes within the BL. BL curator [text removed for publication] explains this impact as a consequence of both the research activity itself and S&A’s standing within BL as a model of success. New archival acquisitions have come about as a direct result of Jolly’s activity: “as a consequence of the S&A project, Ann Oakley’s archive has come to the British Library” [S2]. And the status of S&A has acted as a more general “catalyst” for curators interested in women’s history to successfully petition for resources; thus, as well as the Oakley papers, BL have found resources for the Una Kroll papers and for digitising the entire run of Spare Rib. For [text removed for publication], then, it is the fact that S&A is well-used and that this use has been diligently documented which means she has more power to ask for (and get) resources for women’s history: “the popularity of the S&A material and its well documented use as a curator gives me leverage for such acquisitions” [S3].

Altering Attitudes, Changing Lives

As well as its obvious importance within BL, S&A has become a central resource for a number of educational endeavours, for instance as a resource for AQA’s AS and A-level Sociology [S5]. With a research project as extensive as S&A, and one that has been disseminated so widely, impact has percolated over time. Thus Dr Alice Mukaka can remember being inspired “by the research strategies I learned” from attending an S&A event. She went on to undertake doctoral research using her own oral history to document “women organizing for migrant rights in the United Kingdom”, and now teaches the lesson she learnt at the BL: “the importance of documenting the legacy of feminist leaders in our society” [S7].

A central plank of the BL’s use of S&A has been to engage with school students. School workshops between 2015-2019 have been attended by 1,400 students [S6]. Feedback collected from participants always note enthusiastic engagement, but they also indicate significant impact. One teacher from Heston Community School commented that: “As a result of the session [featuring a S&A oral history clip with footballer Sue Lopez] Year 10 girls have set up a football team, which I think is amazing!’ [S8]. Due to their popularity and success, the BL has made the S&A workshops a permanent offer from the Learning Department, with an increase in their frequency from two to three a month from 2019 (currently paused due to Covid-19) [S3]. Curator [text removed for publication] asserts that the workshops are significant in that they “give students the opportunity to debate a subject which is largely absent from the curriculum” [S3].

Establishing a Model for Feminist Oral History Internationally

Outside of the BL the organisational legacy of Sisterhood and After is its impact as a go-to best-practice model of feminist oral history. Thus when Kristina Schulz and her team established a national oral history archive of the women’s movement in Switzerland they used S&A as their model, copying S&A in their interview method, selection criteria, and in the construction of their website. As they happily acknowledge, “New Women's Movement 2.0 is based on the British Library's ‘Sisterhood and After’ project” [S10]. Similarly when Li HuiBo and her team started conducting their work at the Research Center for Chinese Women’s Oral History (at Chinese Women’s University, Beijing) they looked to S&A to guide their collection and display, including engaging Jolly as consultant. As Li says, S&A also acted as a comparison to “further understand each other’s idea of gender and of oral history’s political purpose, particularly as institutionalized through state funded universities and libraries” [S9]. S&A was the inspiration for these new endeavours and it has also provided a vital model for a feminist-oriented oral history methodology.

Impacting on Social Media Policy

In 2018 the British Army published a new set of guidelines for Army personnel: #DigitalArmy: Using Social Media in the British Army [S8]. The guidance adopts the central recommendations of Maltby’s research: to recognise social media as a fact of everyday life and not something that can be prohibited; to recognise the opportunity for social media to offer positive representations of army life; but also to give clear guidance about what constitutes unacceptable behaviour (from security breaches to inter-personal bullying and sexual harassment). #DigitalArmy uses the language of Maltby’s research, introducing ideas of reputational management and risk (p. 2) and arguing that there is no absolute anonymity online (‘pseudonymity’). Referring to the work of Maltby and her team, the document states: “Research shows that some of our best received communications are created by more junior ranks using digital channels in an authentic manner. The Army is keen to support them” [S8 p. 2]. This represents a decisive shift in policy that acknowledges not simply the reality of social media, but that younger recruits might be the ones most able to contribute to the reputational growth of the Army.

For an institution that is inevitably hierarchical, the dramatic shift underpinning the new policy was generational: thus Lt. Col. [text removed for publication] admits that “the issue we have is we tend to have older people like myself making policy decisions and we need to be able to encompass what young people think in order to make those policies as effective as possible” [S6]. It was this younger perspective that informed #DigitalArmy and was a direct consequence of Maltby’s research: “when I was reviewing the Army’s new social media policy […] I did so with Sarah’s work at the forefront of my mind” [S6].

Maltby’s work emphasised what is at stake around social media and the military: as Blanca Grey, Directorate of Defence Communications, put it, “Maltby really gave us an initial idea of how people perceive the armed forces as not being very inclusive” [S7], and this was predominantly due to online material. The research recommendation to encourage ‘healthy’ social media and to have a policy of responsibility and openness around social media practice “which was taken on board by senior MOD personnel at the time” [S7] is fundamentally embedded in the guidelines and was adopted as part of a policy on retention and inclusivity. #DigitalArmy guidelines are distributed to all Army service personnel (approximately 79,000 regular full-time personnel and 27,000 reserve part-time personnel) and incorporated into annual refresher and pre-deployment training sessions marking a significant footprint for this research [S8].

Changing Perceptions of Social Media in the Armed Forces

The findings from the research were shared at a series of workshops with the Heads of Digital Communications for each of the military services and senior personnel at the Joint Services Command and Staff College (JSCSC). Later Maltby was invited to join the Joint Insight Forum - a newly formed MOD committee of insight and evaluation representatives working across Defence. Maltby’s research initially challenged, even shocked senior military, but that shock resulted in fundamentally new understandings of the opportunities afforded by social media. For a senior academic at the Defence Studies Department at JSCSC, “[Maltby’s] research challenges much of the received wisdom about the MoD's understanding of both the digital environment and how defence practitioners operate within it” [S3]. For another figure involved in Royal Air Force communications at the highest level, the recommendation that “we shouldn’t even try to exert control was well made but potentially shocking”; but this shock led to the recognition that “it’s an important element that we need to tease out and agree on” [S4].

The new understandings generated by Maltby’s research took military thinking away from focusing solely on risk. Thus Clare Parker, Head of Insight and Evaluation at the MOD, found that the “research gave me a better understanding of how we in the MOD need to manage the culture of risk aversion […] Sarah’s work was brilliant and it distilled a lot of long term ‘niggles’ I had about social media and the way the military treated it. It was really helpful” [S2]. The shift away from an obsession with risk allowed the military to think and plan much more generatively around welfare, inclusivity and retention, recognising the crucial role that social media has in maintaining family life. Thus, for a former senior staff member involved in developing the Royal Navy’s Digital Strategy for Defence Communications, research “like Sarah’s is important - if you get this right, you change lives” [S1]. For them, Maltby’s work is continuing to have impact, because it is used to “look at families and the impact on families through social media [which] can help to deliver a sort of strategic effect, which is all about retention” [S1].

Impact Legacy

The British Military are necessarily a secretive institution and unwilling to fully acknowledge how they will exploit and deploy research findings. Thus Neil Verrall, Principal Psychologist in the Defence and Security Analysis Division of Defence Science and Technology Laboratory has only hesitantly revealed that further exploitation of Maltby’s findings is underway, “but due to classification of the projects/topics we cannot provide any further info…except to reassure you that your work is being used along with many other projects to articulate and understand specific issues of interest” [S5]. He is however emphatic: “please be reassured that your important work has not been forgotten” [S5].

The impact of the research has resulted in long-term changes to the built environment of the Southbank, in changes to heritage policy, and in changed perceptions and practices around heritage and skateboarding.

Transformative Communication

The project’s central mode of impact was via the films and associated workshops. These allowed the skaters’ voices to be heard by institutional stakeholders including representatives from Southbank Centre (SBC), Heritage Lottery Fund, Historic England, the Mayor’s Office, and others. The Youth Engagement officer at the BFI commented that the film and the workshop “bridged the gaps between the young people and the policymakers” creating a mutual intelligibility which hitherto hadn’t been possible [S1] . This was recognized by the Director of Policy and Partnerships at the Southbank Centre, who said that the workshop “brought all the participants together” and “helped lift the lessons and the key meanings out of the heat of the campaign” and made the SBC realise why “you can’t move this history” [S2].

Participating in this research increased skaters’ capacity to connect with policy and statutory bodies and “gave confidence and a voice to people who wouldn’t have it otherwise” [S3a]. A skateboarder who spoke at the workshop, said “it brought us together with a lot of people who it is helpful for us to have conversations with” [S3b]. Another young skater, who at 15 had been expelled from school, was able to gain “authority and confidence” from speaking on the workshop panel [S3a].

Following on from the first workshop, and as a result of improved relations, LLSB and the SBC successfully applied for planning permission to extend and restore the Undercroft. This work (which includes a Centre for Children and Young People) was completed shortly after the second workshop. As [text removed for publication] of LLSB argues: “If Pollyanna [Ruiz] hadn’t done that film that history wouldn’t have been recorded and that valuable case study material which has inspired so many people wouldn’t exist and those unheard voices that the film documents would never have been heard” [S3a].

Changing heritage organisations

The value of this research was recognised by the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) who asked the researchers to create a report in which young people could express their sense of value in relation to historic places; its purpose was to enable their views to inform the ongoing evolution of the heritage sector in the UK, particularly the HLF’s youth programme, ‘Young Roots’ [R2]. Deputy Director of Strategy Karen Brookfield noted that the research fed “into a more general strategic thinking …[about]…our next strategic framework, what will HLF fund, and how” [S4]. In 2016 the Heritage Lottery Fund launched a £10million investment to make heritage relevant to the lives of young people aged 11-25 [S5]. Brookfield described this major new development as containing the ‘legacy’ of Ruiz’s project [S6]. The extent of this change was recognized by the head of Policy and Partnerships at the Southbank Centre Mike McCart, who said the research “grabbed both Historic England ... and Heritage Lottery Fund’s interest. They were always being subjected to criticism about being fuddy duddy and only talking to old people … both those conservation bodies began to realize that there was a thing called communal value or intangible value” [S2].

Outside of the HLF, Ruiz’s research has been used to evaluate heritage programmes. When the consultancy agency MHM Insight (an agency supporting charity, heritage and cultural organisations with audience engagement) were asked to evaluate an English Heritage project ‘Shout out Loud’ and a National Trust project working with young people in community green spaces, they adopted the ethos of Ruiz’s project by valuing young people speaking in their own voices, the role of youth-led design, and the concept of ‘found space’ [S7]. [text removed for publication] of MHM Insight, said: “Pollyanna’s research has served as a constructive model of good practice for us, and had a tangible value to us in terms of learning for our organisation” [S7].

Changing Perceptions and Practices

You Can’t Move History won best film in the AHRC’s Research in Film Awards 2016. The panel noted that “this remarkable piece of work challenges easy assumptions about heritage and creates a fascinating portrait of contemporary urban outsiderness in the process” [S8]. The extensive dissemination of the film (20,000 views on Vimeo and YouTube, presentations in Sweden, Spain, Austria, Italy, Canada, Taiwan, Australia as well as in the UK to over 1,000 people) has altered perceptions about heritage and subcultures. For example, a programme officer at UNICEF UK said that the film “opened my eyes to the beauty and far-reaching benefits of the skate community for young people” [S9]. The Director of the Museum of London has added it to the museum’s archive and said; “this research deeply resonates with me as I consider how to create a more tangible and connected place called the Museum of London” [S10]. And Sara Crofts, Head of Historic Environment, Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) said “I try and use [the project] where I can around getting people to rethink their notion of heritage, both policy-makers, potential grant applicants or stakeholders…” [S11].

The research has also been used by grassroots skater organisations from Gateshead to Norwich. As just one example, Skate Southampton used the film (and Ruiz) as the basis for talking to local councillors and representatives of the police. The film helped “explain to people clearly what we wanted to achieve” [S3c]. One major tangible result was an increase in funding for revamping the city skate parks from £50K to £250K.