Bridging the gap between theory and practice in transformative research.

Transformative Research: From Theory to Real-World Impact

Mira Elwood in Science & Nature August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Bridging the Gap Between Ambitious Goals and Practical Application in Transformative Science"

Transformative research (TR) is a hot topic, generating a lot of buzz. But there's a growing divide between the high-minded ideals discussed and what actually happens in the field. We need to take a closer look at what TR truly means in practice.

Often, the goals of TR are set way ahead of the practical realities, creating a situation ripe for over-promising and under-delivering. The pressure to transform both society and the scientific community can be overwhelming and even risky for researchers.

So, what does TR look like on the ground, away from the conference halls and academic papers? How does it differ from other approaches like transdisciplinary research (TD)? This article argues for getting back to basics, emphasizing the need for empirical evidence to guide our theories and actions. Think of it as a call for innovation within the scientific system itself.

Why All the Talk? Examining the Discourse Around Transformative Science

Bridging the gap between theory and practice in transformative research.

Discussions are great for clarifying ideas, testing claims, and establishing norms. However, they can also become detached from real-world observations, driven more by rhetoric and self-referential arguments than by practical insights.

Currently, the TR conversation is heavily focused on setting ambitious goals, with less attention paid to what's actually happening in research and the underlying theory. It's more about what researchers should be doing and less about analyzing what they are doing. This creates a problem: we're judging TR based on its potential, not its proven results.

The Chronology Problem: Transformation is judged retroactively, making it difficult to assess the impact of research in real-time.
The Phantom Goal: True transformation is yet to be proven, leading to discussions about something that doesn't fully exist.
Vague Definitions: The discourse lacks clear, practical guidance on how research can truly be transformative.

If we can observe empirically that 'research is transforming' in the process. Is this happening and how, the discourse remains vague. In prior GAIA articles, the different roles of science have been mentioned when it comes to TR. Roles like driver, catalyst and instigator were mentioned. Yet less often, it boils down to what this translates to in realistic and scientific acts. There is also a lack in social practices in TF and what practice forms should constitute roles and how superordinate goals should be structurally effective.

Moving Forward: Grounded Theory for Transformative Research

To bridge the gap between theory and practice, we need a grounded theory approach to TR. This means starting with real-world observations and using them to develop our understanding, rather than imposing pre-conceived notions. Let's focus on understanding the social practices of TR and the roles researchers play, recognizing that this field is still in an experimental stage. By embedding this perspective, TR can be reconstructed as a social and scientific innovation.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

Everything You Need To Know

What is Transformative Research (TR) and why is there a gap between its ideals and practical application?

Transformative Research (TR) aims to fundamentally change both society and the scientific community. However, a significant gap exists between the ambitious goals of TR and its practical implementation. This gap arises because the focus often lies on high-level ideals and potential rather than real-world results and empirical evidence. The pressure to transform can be overwhelming, leading to over-promising and under-delivering. The discussion around TR is often detached from real-world observations and practical insights, which leads to judging TR based on its potential and not its proven outcomes. The Chronology Problem, The Phantom Goal, and Vague Definitions further exacerbate these issues. The article suggests that, while the goals are often set far in advance of practical realities, there is also a need for clear, practical guidance on how research can truly be transformative.

How does Transformative Research (TR) differ from other research approaches like transdisciplinary research (TD)?

The provided text does not explicitly define how TR differs from TD. However, it emphasizes the need to understand TR in practice and not only in theory. The text argues for the need to focus on empirical evidence to guide theories and actions within TR. It suggests a need to understand the social practices of TR and the roles researchers play, recognizing that TR is still in an experimental stage. The article contrasts the TR with a need for a "getting back to basics" approach. The emphasis is on practical application and real-world impact, potentially differentiating it from approaches that may be more focused on theoretical frameworks or broader interdisciplinary collaboration.

What are the main problems with the current discourse surrounding Transformative Research (TR)?

The current discourse around Transformative Research (TR) faces several problems. Firstly, the conversation often becomes detached from real-world observations, being driven more by rhetoric and self-referential arguments than practical insights. Secondly, the focus is heavily on setting ambitious goals rather than analyzing what researchers are actually doing, leading to a focus on potential rather than proven results. Specific issues include: The Chronology Problem, where the impact is hard to assess in real-time; The Phantom Goal, where true transformation is yet to be proven; and Vague Definitions, which lack clear guidance. There is a lack of social practices in TF and what practice forms should constitute roles and how superordinate goals should be structurally effective.

What is a grounded theory approach to Transformative Research (TR) and why is it important?

A grounded theory approach to Transformative Research (TR) involves starting with real-world observations and using them to develop understanding, rather than imposing pre-conceived notions. This approach is crucial because it bridges the gap between theory and practice. By focusing on the social practices of TR and the roles researchers play, it allows for a more realistic and empirically-driven understanding of how transformation can occur. This also allows TR to be reconstructed as a social and scientific innovation. This approach enables the field to move beyond abstract discussions and focus on practical implementation and measurable impacts, promoting innovation within the scientific system itself.

What are the key roles and elements that should be considered when implementing Transformative Research (TR), according to the provided text?

According to the text, the key roles and elements in implementing Transformative Research (TR) should include a focus on empirical evidence and real-world observations. It is essential to understand the social practices of TR and the roles researchers play, such as drivers, catalysts, and instigators, recognizing that TR is still in an experimental stage. Furthermore, the text highlights the need to analyze what researchers *are* doing and not just what they *should* be doing. The text implies that a grounded theory approach, which emphasizes observation and analysis, is the foundation for effective TR implementation. By focusing on these elements, TR can move from high-minded ideals to practical, impactful outcomes and be reconstructed as a social and scientific innovation.