GRS editorial · Research design
How to Build a Research Agenda from an Institutional Priority
A practical way to turn a broad strategic concern into research questions, projects and decisions.
Research design
A practical starting point.
A practical way to turn a broad strategic concern into research questions, projects and decisions. This guide offers a starting method for teams developing research and institutional decisions. Adapt it to the question, context and relevant scientific, ethics and data requirements.
Step 01
Start with the decision
A priority such as improving public services is too broad to research directly. Identify the decision maker, the decision they face and the time horizon. A useful opening question is: what would change if stronger evidence were available? This separates a research need from a general interest in a subject.
Step 02
Map the evidence gap
List what is already known, what remains contested and where local context may change the conclusion. Speak with intended users and affected groups before finalising questions. Separate descriptive questions about the current system from explanatory questions about causes and evaluative questions about possible responses.
Step 03
Build a sequence
Rank questions by decision value, feasibility, ethics and data availability. A short evidence review can precede a baseline study; a comparative study can then test whether observed patterns differ across settings. Each project needs an owner, method, expected output and point at which its findings will be used.
Step 04
Keep the agenda alive
Review priorities when new evidence, policy changes or stakeholder needs emerge. Record why topics enter or leave the programme. The result is a living portfolio with a clear connection between institutional questions and usable outputs, rather than a list of attractive titles.
Illustrative application
What this could look like.
A public agency concerned about uneven service access might begin with a map of waiting times and eligibility rules, then interview users and providers about barriers. Only after identifying the main uncertainty would it commission a comparative study. The agenda would record which policy decision each stage informs and which evidence would cause the agency to change course.
Put it into practice
A short working checklist.
- Write the precise decision or research question this work should support.
- Record the sources, methods, stakeholders and permissions needed before proceeding.
- Agree who reviews the output and how limitations will be communicated.
- Set a date to revisit the decision when evidence or conditions change.
GRS Group editorial guide · Published 24 September 2026 · Informational guidance, not an empirical study or formal professional advice.
Related research