research and project difference

Home » Education » What is the Difference Between Research and Project

What is the Difference Between Research and Project

The main difference between research and project is that research is the systematic investigation and study of materials and sources to establish facts and reach new conclusions, while a project is a specific and finite activity that gives a measurable and observable result under preset requirements.

Both research and projects use a systematic approach. We also sometimes use the term research project to refer to research studies.

Key Areas Covered

1.  What is Research       – Definition, Features 2. What is a Project      – Definition, Features 3.  Difference Between Research and Project      – Comparison of Key Differences

Research, Project

What is Research

Research is a careful study a researcher conducts using a systematic approach and scientific methods. A research study typically involves several components: abstract, introduction ,  literature review ,  research design, and method , results and analysis, conclusion, bibliography. Researchers usually begin a formal research study with a hypothesis; then, they test this hypothesis rigorously. They also explore and analyze the literature already available on their research subject. This allows them to study the research subject from multiple perspectives, acknowledging different problems that need to be solved.

There are different types of research, the main two categories being quantitative research and qualitative research. Depending on their research method and design, we can also categorize research as descriptive research, exploratory research, longitudinal research, cross-sectional research, etc.

Furthermore, research should always be objective or unbiased. Moreover, if the research involves participants, for example, in surveys or interviews, the researcher should always make sure to obtain their written consent first.

What is a Project

A project is a collaborative or individual enterprise that is carefully planned to achieve a particular aim. We can also describe it as a specific and finite activity that gives a measurable and observable result under preset requirements. This result can be tangible or intangible; for example, product, service, competitive advantage, etc. A project generally involves a series of connected tasks planned for execution over a fixed period of time and within certain limitations like quality and cost. The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) defines a project as a “temporary endeavor with a beginning and an end, and it must be used to create a unique product, service or result.”

Difference Between Research and Project

Research is a careful study conducted using a systematic approach and scientific methods, whereas a project is a collaborative or individual enterprise that is carefully planned to achieve a particular aim.

Research studies are mainly carried out in academia, while projects can be seen in a variety of contexts, including businesses.

The main aim of the research is to seek or revise facts, theories, or principles, while the main aim of a project is to achieve a tangible or intangible result; for example, product, service, competitive advantage, etc.

The main difference between research and project is that research is the systematic investigation and study of materials and sources to establish facts and reach new conclusions, while the project is a specific and finite activity that gives a measurable and observable result under preset requirements.

1. “ What Is a Project? – Definition, Lifecycle and Key Characteristics .” Your Guide to Project Management Best Practices .

Image Courtesy:

1. “ Research ” by Nick Youngson (CC BY-SA 3.0) via The Blue Diamond Gallery 2. “ Project-group-team-feedback ” (CC0) via Pixabay

About the Author: Hasa

Hasanthi is a seasoned content writer and editor with over 8 years of experience. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her engaging and informative writing.

​You May Also Like These

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Research vs. Project — What's the Difference?

Difference Between Research and Project

Table of contents, key differences, comparison chart, compare with definitions, common curiosities, what is a project, is research always part of academic work, can a project include research, how is a project managed, do all research leads to conclusive results, what is research, can anyone conduct research, what is a project timeline, does research require ethical approval, who funds research, are projects only for scientific purposes, what are project deliverables, how is research documented, can research be patented, what is a project budget, share your discovery.

Author Spotlight

Popular Comparisons

Trending Comparisons

New Comparisons

Trending Terms

Search this site

Division of graduate studies menu, division of graduate studies, thesis vs. project.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Qual Health Care

Research versus practice in quality improvement? Understanding how we can bridge the gap

Lisa r hirschhorn.

1 Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

Rohit Ramaswamy

2 Department of Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, 4107 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, CB #7469, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA

Mahesh Devnani

3 Department of Hospital Administration, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, OPD Block Sector 12, Chandigarh 160012, India

Abraham Wandersman

4 Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, 1512 pendleton st, Columbia, SC 29208, USA

Lisa A Simpson

5 AcademyHealth, 1666 K Street, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20006, USA

Ezequiel Garcia-Elorrio

6 Department of Health Care Quality and Patient Safety, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy, Dr. Emilio Ravignani 2024 (C1414CPV), Buenos Aires, Argentina

The gap between implementers and researchers of quality improvement (QI) has hampered the degree and speed of change needed to reduce avoidable suffering and harm in health care. Underlying causes of this gap include differences in goals and incentives, preferred methodologies, level and types of evidence prioritized and targeted audiences. The Salzburg Global Seminar on ‘Better Health Care: How do we learn about improvement?’ brought together researchers, policy makers, funders, implementers, evaluators from low-, middle- and high-income countries to explore how to increase the impact of QI. In this paper, we describe some of the reasons for this gap and offer suggestions to better bridge the chasm between researchers and implementers. Effectively bridging this gap can increase the generalizability of QI interventions, accelerate the spread of effective approaches while also strengthening the local work of implementers. Increasing the effectiveness of research and work in the field will support the knowledge translation needed to achieve quality Universal Health Coverage and the Sustainable Development Goals.

Introduction

After mixed results from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) strategy, the global agenda recognized the critical role of ensuring not just access but quality of health care delivery. As a result, quality and improvement have become a core focus within the Universal Health Coverage movement to achieve the goal of better population health and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)[ 1 – 3 ]. In low- and middle-income countries, quality improvement (QI) is used to identify performance gaps and implement improvement interventions to address these problems at the local, sub national and national levels. Methods used by these improvement interventions range from process improvements using incremental, cyclically implemented changes appropriate to the local context, to system-level interventions and policies to improve and sustain quality. Regardless of the scope of improvement efforts and methods employed, the impact and spread of QI has often fallen short. Causes of these lost opportunities include how decisions about improvement interventions are made, the methodology for measuring the effectiveness of the intervention, what data are collected and used and how the information on both the implementation and the intervention is communicated to drive spread and knowledge translation [ 4 , 5 ]. Practitioners engaged in improvement in their organizations are frustrated by research reviews which often show a lack of conclusiveness about the effectiveness of QI when many of them see the local benefits from their work. Researchers complain about the lack of rigor in the application of QI methods in practice sittings and about poor documentation of the implementation process [ 6 ].

There is a growing realization of the need for common ground between implementers and researchers that promotes use of more systematic and rigorous methods to assess the improvement intervention effectiveness when appropriate but does not demand that all QI implementations be subject to the experimental methods commonly considered to be the gold standard of evidence. To explore the causes of this gap and address how to bridge the gap and better engage the targeted consumers of generated knowledge, including communities, governments and funders, a session ‘Better Health Care: How do we learn about improvement?’ was organized by Salzburg Global Seminar (SGS) [ 7 ]. The session brought together experts from a range of fields and organizations, including researchers, improvement implementers from the field, policy makers, and representatives from countries and international organizations.

For a partnership between researchers and implementers to become more consistent in improvement projects and studies, the incentives and priorities of each of these groups need to be better aligned in QI work and its evaluation. In this paper, we build on the Salzburg discussions, existing literature, and our own experience to explore the barriers to collaboration and offer suggestions on how to start to address these barriers. In the spirit of quality improvement, we hope that these recommendations are adopted and tried by groups interested in advancing the research and the practice of QI.

Why the gap exists

Both groups use data to evaluate whether improvements have taken place and are interested in the question of ‘did it work’. However, these gaps have occurred in part because of differences in goals, evidence needs and methods used and incentives for results and dissemination.

As we consider the major differences between researchers and implementers, we should recognize that there is not a clearly defined dichotomy between these two groups. Rather, those who are focused on in improvement are part of a continuum and are driven by a range of goals from driving and demonstrating local improvements to a focus on attributing these improvements to QI methods that can be generalized and spread, as illustrated in Table ​ Table1, 1 , which also describes differences in incentives, discussed further below. Organization-based implementers focus on quality improvement projects, where the primary goal is driving change to a local problem to improve care. Policy and decision makers' goals are broader improvement, needing evidence for current and future decision on what methods and implementation strategies to use. Researchers have a goal of developing new and generalizable knowledge about the effectiveness of QI methods.

Selected participants and stakeholders in quality improvement work and research and their incentives and goals

Incentives for results and dissemination

The differences in goals and evidence are related to often competing incentives. Implementers are incentivized to improve quality and meet the demands of stakeholders, whether local communities, government or funders. Researchers are rewarded through dissemination of evidence in high-impact peer-reviewed journals, research grants and academic promotions. Policy makers are rewarded by timely response to gaps with broad visible changes in their populations. Timeframes of these incentives are also often different, with the most rigorous studies taking years to measure impact, followed by careful analysis and dissemination. Implementers and policy makers, however, are often under pressure to show short-term change and respond to new and emerging issues even as they continue with existing improvement work.

The goals of documentation and dissemination of projects can also differ between researchers and implementers and their stakeholders. There is a strong recognition that the evidence generated by even the best QI efforts is not effectively translated into further spread and adoption [ 8 ]. This is because implementers working on QI interventions in their organizations are incentivized by improvement and do not usually have a demand to document their work beyond communication with organizational leaders. While there are growing venues for sharing of case reports through learning collaboratives and local meetings designed to facilitate peer learning, this documentation typically involves a description of the process of implementation, but not at a level of detail or rigor of value to researchers and the broader community. There are a number of disincentives for implementers to increase the rigor and detail of their local work including competing demands to deliver services and ongoing improvement, and the paucity of journals interested in publishing even well- documented local results because they prioritize rigorous results of evaluations with strong designs involving carefully constructed QI research studies. Researchers are incentivized by more academic dissemination through these peer-reviewed journals and presentation at conferences. This nonalignment results in practitioners being deprived of access to broader venues to disseminate their work and researchers losing rich contextual data that is critically important to evaluate the effectiveness of QI.

Evidence needed and methods prioritized

The differences in the goals and incentives of different stakeholders lead to differences in the amount of evidence that is considered adequate and the methods used to generate this evidence. Implementers are interested in the evidence of change in their local projects, with less emphasis on transferring or generalizing what they did for use in other settings. They may rely on a combination of pre-and-post intervention data, QI statistical methods such as run charts and tacit organizational knowledge to assess the evidence of change in their projects. Policy makers have an interest in evidence which is robust enough from the QI to inform resource allocation, but may still have a focus on a specific geography rather than generalizability at scale. They are interested in generalizable knowledge about successful QI methods, but are sensitive to the burden and costs and time of requiring rigorous research methods on implementing groups.

Researchers aim for evidence which is robust enough to provide globally relevant conclusions with limited threats to internal validity. This group is most supportive of the use of rigorous experimental research designs to generate the highest possible standards of evidence. Traditionally, this had been limited to a small set of rigid experimental designs with appropriate controls or comparison groups driven in part by research funders and academic standards to be able to attribute change to the improvement interventions. This set of designs has been expanding in the past few years as better understanding of the value of quasi-experimental methods has emerged. [ 9 , 10 ]

Why better alignment is needed

QI interventions differ from many fixed clinical or public health interventions [ 11 ]. In this supplement, Ramaswamy and others describe QI interventions as complex (multi-pronged and context-specific) interventions in complex systems (non-linear pathways and emergent behaviors). For better learning from QI, implementers, policy makers and researchers both need to know not just effectiveness (the focus of local measurement, outcomes research and impact evaluation) but also 'how and why' the change happened (implementation), cost and sustainability ensuring that the evidence produced will be more relevant to the stakeholders at the local and broader level. Therefore, finding a common ground through ‘development of a culture of partnership’ [ 12 ] to co-identify appropriate methods and data collection to understand and disseminate implementation strategies is critical to inform how to how to create the different knowledge products: generalizable evidence for dissemination (researchers), insights into how to scale (policy makers) and how to sustain the improvements (implementers) [ 13 ]. A well-known and commonly cited example is the Surgical Safety Checklist, which was found to improve adherence to evidence-based practices and save lives across a range of settings [ 14 ]. However, attempts to replicate these successes were not always effective since capturing generalizable knowledge on how to introduce and support the implementation of this intervention with fidelity was not part of the original research dissemination, [ 15 ] a lesson understood by the original researchers and addressed through accompanying toolkits [ 16 ].

Another important area where collaboration between implementers and researchers is needed to improve learning from QI in understanding the impact of different contextual factors to identify which aspects of an improvement intervention are generalizable, which are context-specific and which are critical to address when planning replication. During the seminar, a study of antenatal corticosteroids (ANCS), an intervention found in higher income settings to reduce death among premature infants, was discussed to identify how contextual factors can be better addressed through local knowledge to inform implementation [ 17 ]. The randomized controlled trial showed that implementation of ANCS in low-resource settings resulted in increased mortality among some of the infants who were given steroids; the published conclusion was that ANCS was not a recommended improvement intervention in these settings. The group identified the gap in the translation of ANCS use from resource richer settings did not consider the different contextual factors which required adaption such as the lack of capacity to accurately determine prematurity needed to determine eligibility for the steroids.

Starting the work to bridge the gap

Based on the reasons for the gaps identified above, we recommend a number of initial steps to better bridge the gap between researchers and implementers:

• Aligning project goals and joint planning : Before QI projects get launched, the initial work must start with implementers and researchers discussing and agreeing on the goals and objectives of the work including and beyond local improvement. In addition to alignment of improvement goals, all stakeholders must be engaged at the start of the QI project to agree on the purposes and uses of the results, local learning or broader dissemination or both. This work needs to happen at the design phase and continue with ongoing planned communication throughout the work. This will ensure that all stakeholders are jointly engaged in identifying the most appropriate research questions and the most appropriate methods to answer them.

The need to understand both process and context in the evaluation and study of QI interventions also cannot be accomplished without engaging both researchers and practitioners in the process [ 13 ]. The knowledge about how the project was implemented, and what was relevant to the context often resides with those responsible for implementation. However, as mentioned previously, the implementers often have neither the incentives nor the support to systematically document and disseminate this knowledge in a way that makes it available for general use. Researchers can play a key role in influencing the QI research integration by supporting systematic documentation of the implementation process in addition to an evaluation of outcomes and by partnering with implementers to make this happen. Introduction of adaptive designs such as SMART trials into improvement research may also offer a common ground where improvement implementers and researchers can collaborate introducing use of data to make mid-course changes to the implementation design.

• Building implementer research capacity. Building capacity of implementers as potential producers of and better consumers of research and evaluation results in another important approach to bridge the gap. For example, empowerment evaluation is designed to increase the likelihood that programs will achieve results by increasing the capacity of program stakeholders to plan, implement and evaluate their own program [ 19 ]. Building capacity within implementing organizations through technical support provided by researchers for interested implementers can establish a viable infrastructure for practitioners and researchers to work together more effectively. For example, multi-year research practice partnerships in facilities in Kenya has led to sustainable QI programs with dissemination of methods and results through co-authored peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations [ 20 ] Similar results were seen for research capacity building targeting implementers in the Africa Health Initiative in five countries in Africa [ 21 ]. Support for practice-based researchers to build their capacity in QI and in process evaluation using implementation science methods can also increase the potential of improvement projects to produce the knowledge needed about the implementation to spread learning within and beyond their organization.
• Aligning incentives to drive collaboration : Creating areas of shared incentives will require initiatives from funders and universities to appreciate the higher value of co-produced research, reward capacity building of researchers in the field and fund innovative models of embedded research where researchers are part of or embedded into the implementing organization [ 22 ]. In addition, offering opportunities for meaningful participation in research and building capacity for this work among implementers has also been associated with better improvement and dissemination [ 23 ].
• Simplifying documentation for dissemination of learning : As mentioned earlier, it is useful for both implementers and researchers if documenting the implementation of QI programs becomes part of routine practice. However, this will not happen without simplifying documentation standards. SQUIRE and TiDieR guidelines are very helpful for academic publications. However, they are not always a good fit for projects whose primary purpose is not research but who have the potential to add to the knowledge needed to improve QI [ 24 , 25 ]. Researchers could partner with implementers to develop simpler, practice-based research guidelines and to create other venues such as through existing organizations focused on quality and improvement where methods and results could be posted using these guidelines without a formal peer-review process. Templates and examples could be provided to improve the quality of documentation as well as editorial staff to assist with structure and formatting. The incentive for implementers is to get their stories told, and at the same time provide an opportunity for researchers to get data on where to focus further research. In addition, there are growing options to share knowledge and research findings such as the WHO Global Learning Lab for Quality UHC which provides a forum for implementers to disseminate work available to broader community [ 26 ].

To improve learning from and effectiveness of QI work requires involvement and collaboration between both researchers and practitioners. Researchers can advance the field by creating generalizable knowledge on the effectiveness of interventions and on implementation strategies and practitioners improve outcomes on the ground by implementing QI interventions. By increasing the collaboration, more systematic evaluations of interventions in local contexts and better design of research will result in production of the generalizable knowledge needed to increase the impact of QI. In order for this to take place, there needs to be an intentional effort to address the gaps that challenge researchers and practitioners working together. This can occur by aligning incentives, increasing the value and utility of produced research to implementers, and as a shared community developing new guidance to bring these different groups to more effective collaboration. The growing experience in QI and improvement science offers many opportunities for better collaboration between researchers and implementers to increase the value of this partnership to accelerating progress toward quality Universal Health Coverage and the Sustainable Development Goals.

M.D. received financial support from SGS to attend this seminar.

Dissertation vs Thesis vs Capstone Project What’s the difference?

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | October 2020

At Grad Coach, we receive questions about dissertation and thesis writing on a daily basis – everything from how to find a good research topic to which research methods to use  and how to analyse the data.

One of the most common questions we receive is “what’s the difference between a dissertation and thesis?” . If you look around online, you’ll find a lot of confusing and often contrasting answers. In this post we’ll clear it up, once and for all…

Need a helping hand?

Dissertation vs Thesis: Showdown Time

Before comparing dissertations to theses, it’s useful to first understand what both of these are and what they have in common .

Dissertations and theses are both formal academic research projects . In other words, they’re academic projects that involve you undertaking research in a structured, systematic way. The research process typically involves the following steps :

• Asking a well-articulated and meaningful research question (or questions).
• Assessing what other researchers have said in relation to that question (this is usually called a literature review – you can learn more about that up here).
• Undertaking your own research using a clearly justified methodology – this often involves some sort of fieldwork such as interviews or surveys – and lastly,
• Deriving an answer to your research question based on your analysis.

In other words, theses and dissertations are both formal, structured research projects that involve using a clearly articulated methodology to draw out insights and answers to your research questions . So, in this respect, they are, for the most part, the same thing.

But, how are they different then?

Well, the key difference between a dissertation and a thesis is, for the most part, the level of study – in other words, undergrad, master or PhD. By extension, this also means that the complexity and rigorousness of the research differs between dissertations and theses.

So, which is which?

This is where it gets a bit confusing. The meaning of dissertation or thesis varies depending on the country or region of study. For example, in the UK, a dissertation is generally a research project that’s completed at the end of a Masters-level degree, whereas a thesis is completed for a Doctoral-level degree.

Conversely, the terminology is flipped around in the US (and some other countries). In other words, a thesis is completed for a Masters-level degree, while a dissertation is completed for PhD (or any other doctoral-level degree).

Simply put, a dissertation and a thesis are essentially the same thing, but at different levels of study . The exact terminology varies from country to country, and sometimes it even varies between universities in the same country. Some universities will also refer to this type of project as a capstone project . In addition, some universities will also require an oral exam or viva voce , especially for doctoral-level projects. 

Given that there are more than 25,000 universities scattered across the globe, all of this terminological complexity can cause some confusion. To be safe, make sure that you thoroughly read the brief provided by your university for your dissertation or thesis, and if possible, visit the university library to have a look at past students’ projects . This will help you get a feel for your institution’s norms and spot any nuances in terms of their specific requirements so that you can give them exactly what they want.

Let’s recap

Dissertations and theses are both formal academic research projects . The main difference is the level of study – undergrad, Masters or PhD. Terminology tends to vary from country to country, and even within countries.

Need help with your research project?

Get in touch with a friendly Grad Coach to discuss how we can help you fast-track your dissertation or thesis today. Book a free, no-obligation consultation here.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

GRADCOACH youtube and materials are awesome for new researchers. Keep posting such materials so that many new researchers can benefit form them.

Am happy to be part of the family hope you will help me with more information through my email

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

• What Is Research Methodology? Simple Definition (With Examples) - Grad Coach - […] you’ve started working on your first piece of formal research – be it a dissertation, thesis or research project…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Please log in to save materials. Log in

What'S The Difference Between A Project And A Research Project?

Be sure to read previous customer reviews and compare prices before making your decision. You can check the services offered, pricing policy, terms, reviews and guarantees. In addition, you can use the provided lists of the best services to get detailed information on guarantees, pricing policy, quality of documents, as well as see real reviews and reviews.    It is always important to work with legal services that can guarantee maximum confidentiality and no plagiarism in documents. To get a perfectly written online document, you need to hire the best online writing assistance company. There are many great online services to help you write your essay quickly and efficiently. Start by reading reviews and find several article writing websites to check them out.

best essay writing service reviews 2022

However, the main difference is that while an academic research proposal is for a specific line of research, a project proposal is for approval of a relatively smaller enterprise or scientific scheme; most often, project proposals are written with the intent of obtaining support in the form of budget penalties and permission to devote time and effort to the chosen project. Here it must be remembered that the forms, procedures and principles of academic research proposals are much more rigorous than for project proposals; it goes without saying that even the standard is much more demanding than in the project proposals. 

While format, length, and content may vary, the overall goal of academic research proposals and project proposals remains the same: approval by supervisors, academic committees, or reviews . This article will discuss the complexities of academic research proposals and project proposals, thereby helping readers understand the differences between the two. The following steps describe a simple and effective research paper writing strategy.  You will most likely start your research with a working, preliminary, or preliminary thesis, which you will refine until you are sure where the evidence leads. The thesis says what you believe and what you are going to prove. Good thesis statement distinguishes a thoughtful research project from a mere review of the facts. A good experimental thesis will help you focus your search for information. 

Before embarking on serious research, do some preliminary research to determine if there is enough information for your needs and to set the context for your research. Now that the direction of your research is clear to you, you can start searching for material on your topic. Choose a topic on which you can find an acceptable amount of information.  People wishing to publish the results of a quality assurance project should read this guide. Worksheets for assessing whether a quality assurance activity is also exploratory The following are two worksheets to help researchers determine whether to consult with the IRB before starting a quality assurance project. 

The main similarity between a thesis and a research project is that both can be inserted as academic papers. To understand the difference between a thesis and a research project, it is necessary to understand the similarities between the two terms. A dissertation is much more thorough than a research project; is a collection of various studies carried out in the field of study, which includes a critical analysis of their results. It aims to present and justify the necessity and importance of conducting research, as well as to present practical ways of conducting research. In addition, he should discuss the main issues and questions that the researcher will raise during the course of the study. Take on a topic that can be adequately covered in the given project format. A strong thesis is provocative; takes a stand and justifies the discussion you present. 

It contains the introduction, problematic hypothesis, objectives, hypothesis, methodology, rationale, and implications of the research project. The information collected during the study culminates in an application document such as policy recommendations, curriculum development, or program evaluation. The purpose of a design study is to collect information that will help solve an identifiable problem in a specific context. The purpose of design research is not to add to our understanding of research on a topic. The key difference between design research and a dissertation is that design research does not start from a research problem. The main difference between a terminating project and a thesis is that a terminating project addresses a specific problem, problem, or problem in your field of study, while a dissertation attempts to create new knowledge. The final project focuses on a narrow and specific topic, while the dissertation addresses a broader and more general issue. 

The main difference between projects and programs is usually that projects are designed to produce results while programs are designed to achieve business results. Obviously, there are some similarities between projects and programs, namely that they are both interested in change, i.e., in creating something new, and both require the use of a team to achieve a goal. To make the difference between project and programme more concrete, let's look at a practical example of the difference between project and programme. But to understand the difference, you need to start by understanding the definitions of projects and programmes. In a project portfolio, each project is responsible for managing multiple projects. The figure also highlights the differences between the project management level and the program and portfolio. 

Program Managers Project Managers Program Managers create the overall plans that are used to manage projects. Project management has a defined timeline with a defined deliverable that determines the end date. The program manager defines the vision, which is especially important when he oversees several projects at the same time. Program managers need to think strategically, especially as they often have to negotiate between different organizations and sometimes between multiple projects interacting over a program. Indeed, some of these projects can be so large and complex that they are programs in their own right. Thus, our software projects will only be one of the projects controlled by the program. Project Report Research Report Mainly focuses on achieving the desired outcome of the project. The focus is on providing information derived from data and problem analysis. A project report, as the name suggests, is simply a report that provides useful and important information to make better business decisions and also helps in project management. 

Conversely, a research report defines what is being sought, sources of data collection, how data is collected (for example, a research report focuses on the results of a completed research work. The research proposal has been submitted, evaluated, taking into account a number of factors, such as the associated costs , potential impact, soundness of the project implementation plan This is usually a request for research funding on the subject of study.  Instead, the research report is prepared after the project is completed. The research proposal is written in the future, the time used in the research report is past because it is written in the third person. Research proposals are approximately 4-10 pages in length. On the other hand, research consists of proving the main thesis backed up by evidence and data. Originality and personal research are important components of a dissertation. This dissertation engages the student in stimulating or provocative research and shows a level of thinking that opens up new horizons. Researching and writing an article will be more enjoyable if you are writing about something interesting. 

Source:  https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/top-5-best-essay-writing-service-reviews-comparative-study-167031

https://www.we-heart.com/2022/08/30/5-best-personal-statement-writing-services/

Difference between Research and Project

What is the difference between research and project.

Research as a noun is diligent inquiry or examination to seek or revise facts, principles, theories, applications, et cetera; laborious or continued search after truth. while Project as a noun is a planned endeavor, usually with a specific goal and accomplished in several steps or stages.

Part of speech: noun

Definition: Diligent inquiry or examination to seek or revise facts, principles, theories, applications, et cetera; laborious or continued search after truth. A particular instance or piece of research.

Part of speech: verb

Definition: to search or examine with continued care; to seek diligently. to make an extensive investigation into. to search again.

Example sentence: Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing.

Definition: A planned endeavor, usually with a specific goal and accomplished in several steps or stages. An urban low-income housing building.

Definition: To extend beyond a surface. To cast (an image or shadow) upon a surface. To extend (a protrusion or appendage) outward. To make plans for; to forecast.

We hope you now know whether to use Research or Project in your sentence.

Difference between form and make

Difference between quicken and renovate, shovel and trowel - what's the difference, dare vs daring, peruke and periwig - what's the difference, overall and jumpsuit - what's the difference, uninflected vs analytic, difference between sweet and sweetly, popular articles, differentiating oled and qled tvs: which is right for you, major differences between google tv and android tv, reading on an ipad vs reading on a kindle, difference between disney+ hotstar(indian version) and disney+ international version.

People often get confused between similar sounding words or synonyms. Most of the time these words have slightly different meanings, and some time entirely different meanings. We help people discover the difference between these words.

• Master Your Homework
• Do My Homework

The Difference Between Research Papers and Proposals

Research papers and proposals are two distinct yet closely related writing projects that can be confusing to differentiate between. This article seeks to explore the similarities and differences between research papers and proposals in order to better inform readers of their respective purpose, style, scope, structure, audience, and more. By the end of this article readers will have a greater understanding of both types of written work so they may make an informed decision about which project is best suited for their needs.

I. Introduction to Research Papers and Proposals

Ii. definition of research paper, iii. components of a research paper, iv. definition of proposal, v. components of a proposal, vi. differences between a research paper and proposal, vii. conclusion.

A World of Possibilities Research papers and proposals offer a window into the unlimited world of ideas. Whether it be delving into scientific discovery, exploring philosophical concepts, or uncovering ancient literature, these two forms of writing open up doors to new possibilities. But what exactly are research papers and proposals? While they share some similarities in terms of structure and purpose, there are key differences between them that should not be overlooked.

• Research Papers: typically involve an investigation process leading towards a synthesis report on any given topic – for example analyzing trends in poverty alleviation strategies worldwide.
• Proposals: focus more on offering solutions; often outlining various steps or processes needed to address particular issues – such as proposing changes within existing health care systems.

. It’s important to keep this distinction in mind when selecting which type is most suitable for your purposes.

A research paper is a type of academic writing that involves the use of scholarly sources and an analysis to investigate specific topics. Research papers often rely on primary or secondary data, such as surveys or experiments, to analyze and explain their findings. The resulting document provides new insights into a topic by examining existing information in a fresh way.

• Offers an initial exploration , providing possible solutions for further study.

The main components of a research paper, regardless of its subject or length, is the same. As such it is essential to understand what they are and how to include them in your work.

• Introduction: The introduction should provide an overview of your topic and explain why the issue you’re discussing matters. Additionally, be sure to note any gaps in knowledge that may exist regarding this particular topic so you can address these throughout the course of your paper.
• Literature Review: After providing background information on your chosen topic or problem area, conduct a thorough review of relevant literature from reliable sources. This will enable you to discuss current practices related to this field as well as explore various theories surrounding it.

A Proposal: An Overview

• At its core, a proposal is an offer of solutions to a particular problem.
• Proposals can come in many forms and for various purposes, but the basic structure remains the same across disciplines.

Therefore, when crafting a proposal you must demonstrate why your proposed plan not only provides a remedy but also brings value by outlining potential benefits as well as risks associated with the suggested solution. Additionally, explain who will benefit from this proposition (e.g., customers/stakeholders) and what resources are needed to implement such changes in order facilitate success. In addition to convincing others that they need your services/product/idea; effective communication goes hand-in-hand with successful selling. Use clear language and succinctly convey why this initiative would be beneficial and worth investing in.

A research proposal and paper are two distinct entities, although many individuals use the terms interchangeably. A research paper is a document that contains an analysis of data gathered from multiple sources on a particular topic. It must be well written with proper citations for any outside resources used in its composition. In contrast, a research proposal , while also including elements such as data collection methods and conclusions about the results of said methods, aims to persuade others to invest their own time or money into studying the same subject.

When constructing either type of document it’s important to consider all components necessary for successful completion:

• Problem Statement – Provides evidence that there is something worth exploring further.
• Literature Review – Examines previous studies related to your topic so you can place your work within larger context of existing knowledge.
• Research Methodology – Describes how you intend gather information; typically quantitative or qualitative approaches are employed.

Comparing a Research Paper and Proposal Research papers and proposals share certain elements, yet differ in purpose and execution. While both may involve extensive research, the former is generally focused on an existing topic or area of study while the latter endeavors to introduce a new concept. Below are some key points that differentiate between these two types of documents.

• A research paper , which can be based on primary sources such as interviews or surveys, typically begins with an introduction to its topic followed by analysis that supports it.
• In contrast, a proposal , often written for academic purposes like grant funding applications or college admissions decisions, provides specific information regarding what should be done in order to solve problems related to its subject matter.

. Generally speaking, this includes detailed descriptions about possible solutions along with any pertinent background data needed for evaluation.

In this research paper, the purpose was to compare and contrast a research proposal with an actual written research paper. Through exploring both topics in detail, it has been shown that there is a stark difference between them. A research proposal is more focused on providing an outline of what the researcher intends to accomplish whereas the completed project will go into far greater detail about each aspect of their study.

• Research Proposal : The primary aim of a proposal document is for approval by supervisors or academics; they are used as a tool for clarifying ideas and setting out clear objectives before any data collection takes place.
• Research Paper: This requires extensive work after approval has been given – from collecting relevant data to analysing results, all prior knowledge must be synthesised in order to form conclusions which can then be presented through writing.

In conclusion, this article has outlined the differences between research papers and proposals. Research papers are often used to explore a subject or answer questions through experiments and analyses while proposals attempt to present an argument for approval from another individual or organization. Knowing the distinction between these two forms of writing can help individuals better understand how best to approach their own projects and properly communicate with colleagues in academic settings.

Colorado State University

• Walter Scott, Jr. College of Engineering

Monday, April 29

• University Source
• Agricultural Sciences
• Health and Human Sciences
• Liberal Arts
• Natural Sciences
• Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences
• Warner College of Natural Resources
• Office of Engagement and Extension

Internship spotlight: Working on groundbreaking battery research with Amanda Mohrlang

By Russell Dickerson

Internships are an important way for students to find out how their career can impact the world. Fourth-year chemical and biological engineering student Amanda Mohrlang found her passion for computational modeling through a hands-on research internship at Prieto Battery, helping with groundbreaking energy research.

Engineering Source talked with Mohrlang about her Cogen internship, Prieto Battery, and her advice for other students interested in their own internships.

How did the internship get started, and what was it like?

The Cogen Internship program  gives you networking connections to smaller startup companies, ones that might not be able to fully fund an engineering internship. It was also in connection with She’s in Power, an organization based at the CSU Energy Institute  that focuses on helping women get access, resources, and confidence to pursue energy research.

They paired me with Prieto Battery, which is the company that I was really interested in and still work at. The company works on three-dimensional, interdigitated battery research, and at the beginning of the summer announced the fastest charging battery in the world . They handed it to me on my first day, which is crazy. I said, “please take it back, this is too important.”

They’re very forward-thinking and it’s a very diverse population of people who work there. Which was amazing for me because the huge part of this internship was just learning about company dynamics.

What was the thing you learned the most about? Did it help solidify your career path or ideas?

It helped me learn how much of a passion I have for computational modeling. Hopefully I can transition into a job at the company working on computational modeling and different engineering projects.

The bulk of my internship over the summer was spent doing cathode optimization, a pretty complicated process of building this perfect material. I spent quite a few weeks at the beginning really figuring out how to do all that. It was a fantastic experience because I learned so many technological pieces, viscosity measurements, particle size measurements, how to use all of the glove boxes, and everything with lithium. I definitely learned a lot about all the safety procedures and how to change all the gas tubes and everything, which I didn’t realize was important until I was looking at some other jobs.

What’s the difference between what you’ve learned in your classes compared to the internship?

Actually the ending of that project was a little unsatisfying to me because I didn’t find the optimization that we were hoping for. I did find out a lot about the current cathode slurry, and I actually got to spend a couple of weeks trying to fix nickel foam. Which is a great thing for me because I was able to practice a lot of problem solving skills that I’ve learned in engineering and know from chemistry and everything, trying to fix a foam that’s broken.

The internship helped me learn that in industry not every project gets fully finished the way you want it to, especially in a research startup. You have to keep going. I would get stuck for a week and I would be working on other things. That was something I hadn’t really experienced in school. So it’s cool to have that really authentic experience, and they really wanted me as an intern to experience some of that and not just have everything handed to me.

Did that change your project or overall focus?

I think the main thing for me was perspective. If you go into every project with tunnel vision, you’re going to miss a lot because that’s not at all what you’re there for. You have to take into account all of the changing variables.

I realized that it wasn’t failure, it was more just a step in the right direction. Even though that project didn’t turn out how I would have wanted it to, it was still the best for the company. Being able to say this project isn’t going anywhere, that we need to go at it from a different angle. It was a skill that I honestly hadn’t had to use very much in school, and so it was definitely good to learn that.

It helped as a stepping stone to the next project, which I think was good for me because I definitely spent a couple of weeks saying, “the thing that they want me to do, I can’t do it. It’s not working.” And they’d say, “We don’t know if it works at all. That was kind of the whole goal of figuring out if that’s even a possibility.”

Are you comfortable being on that bleeding edge of technology, where you maybe don’t get an answer?

Honestly, I have mixed feelings. Part of me is really excited about it because we’re learning things that nobody else has figured out. Or they combine things in a way that nobody else has, which is very exciting. But it’s also a little bit frustrating because I do like getting answers and solutions and moving forward with something, with a satisfying ending to a project.

It’s definitely a learning curve for me having to change the perception, and expectation, from an ending to a project or a beautiful, nice answer that I can box. The answer might be more visceral and vague. But as long as it’s pushing me in the direction of more projects and more knowledge in that area, that’s what I want.

What advice would you give to other students interested in internships?

Definitely go for it. Doing things as an intern, while you’re still learning and it’s more low key, there’s a little bit less expectations. People understand this is new for you. They want to give you advice, and they want to answer your questions.

I think having at least one internship, maybe two if you can, helps because you can try a larger company or a smaller company. I learned that they’re very different. The company, community, and the culture is honestly way more important than I thought.

And that’s completely flipped my entire job search on its head. It’s nice because now I know better the things that are important to me and my career. So I can make a more educated, thoughtful decision about where I want to work or what I want to do.

Odds are too that an internship will probably want to keep you on because you’re already in there learning. Prieto Battery asked me to stay on for the fall, so I got to continue a different version of my projects and transition to a paid position.

Which surprised me because I was kind of expecting the internship to be a summer thing. I’m still doing it and still loving it.

Tags assigned to this story

• google+ -->

Russell Dickerson

What Makes the Difference in Whether Districts Use or Ignore Research?

Professor Meredith Honig discusses her new study of district research partnerships that were attempting to implement new school improvement programs backed by research.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades

The gender gap in pay has remained relatively stable in the United States over the past 20 years or so. In 2022, women earned an average of 82% of what men earned, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of median hourly earnings of both full- and part-time workers. These results are similar to where the pay gap stood in 2002, when women earned 80% as much as men.

As has long been the case, the wage gap is smaller for workers ages 25 to 34 than for all workers 16 and older. In 2022, women ages 25 to 34 earned an average of 92 cents for every dollar earned by a man in the same age group – an 8-cent gap. By comparison, the gender pay gap among workers of all ages that year was 18 cents.

While the gender pay gap has not changed much in the last two decades, it has narrowed considerably when looking at the longer term, both among all workers ages 16 and older and among those ages 25 to 34. The estimated 18-cent gender pay gap among all workers in 2022 was down from 35 cents in 1982. And the 8-cent gap among workers ages 25 to 34 in 2022 was down from a 26-cent gap four decades earlier.

The gender pay gap measures the difference in median hourly earnings between men and women who work full or part time in the United States. Pew Research Center’s estimate of the pay gap is based on an analysis of Current Population Survey (CPS) monthly outgoing rotation group files ( IPUMS ) from January 1982 to December 2022, combined to create annual files. To understand how we calculate the gender pay gap, read our 2013 post, “How Pew Research Center measured the gender pay gap.”

The COVID-19 outbreak affected data collection efforts by the U.S. government in its surveys, especially in 2020 and 2021, limiting in-person data collection and affecting response rates. It is possible that some measures of economic outcomes and how they vary across demographic groups are affected by these changes in data collection.

In addition to findings about the gender wage gap, this analysis includes information from a Pew Research Center survey about the perceived reasons for the pay gap, as well as the pressures and career goals of U.S. men and women. The survey was conducted among 5,098 adults and includes a subset of questions asked only for 2,048 adults who are employed part time or full time, from Oct. 10-16, 2022. Everyone who took part is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Here are the questions used in this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology .

The  U.S. Census Bureau has also analyzed the gender pay gap, though its analysis looks only at full-time workers (as opposed to full- and part-time workers). In 2021, full-time, year-round working women earned 84% of what their male counterparts earned, on average, according to the Census Bureau’s most recent analysis.

Much of the gender pay gap has been explained by measurable factors such as educational attainment, occupational segregation and work experience. The narrowing of the gap over the long term is attributable in large part to gains women have made in each of these dimensions.

Related: The Enduring Grip of the Gender Pay Gap

Even though women have increased their presence in higher-paying jobs traditionally dominated by men, such as professional and managerial positions, women as a whole continue to be overrepresented in lower-paying occupations relative to their share of the workforce. This may contribute to gender differences in pay.

Other factors that are difficult to measure, including gender discrimination, may also contribute to the ongoing wage discrepancy.

Perceived reasons for the gender wage gap

When asked about the factors that may play a role in the gender wage gap, half of U.S. adults point to women being treated differently by employers as a major reason, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in October 2022. Smaller shares point to women making different choices about how to balance work and family (42%) and working in jobs that pay less (34%).

There are some notable differences between men and women in views of what’s behind the gender wage gap. Women are much more likely than men (61% vs. 37%) to say a major reason for the gap is that employers treat women differently. And while 45% of women say a major factor is that women make different choices about how to balance work and family, men are slightly less likely to hold that view (40% say this).

Parents with children younger than 18 in the household are more likely than those who don’t have young kids at home (48% vs. 40%) to say a major reason for the pay gap is the choices that women make about how to balance family and work. On this question, differences by parental status are evident among both men and women.

Views about reasons for the gender wage gap also differ by party. About two-thirds of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (68%) say a major factor behind wage differences is that employers treat women differently, but far fewer Republicans and Republican leaners (30%) say the same. Conversely, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say women’s choices about how to balance family and work (50% vs. 36%) and their tendency to work in jobs that pay less (39% vs. 30%) are major reasons why women earn less than men.

Democratic and Republican women are more likely than their male counterparts in the same party to say a major reason for the gender wage gap is that employers treat women differently. About three-quarters of Democratic women (76%) say this, compared with 59% of Democratic men. And while 43% of Republican women say unequal treatment by employers is a major reason for the gender wage gap, just 18% of GOP men share that view.

Pressures facing working women and men

Family caregiving responsibilities bring different pressures for working women and men, and research has shown that being a mother can reduce women’s earnings , while fatherhood can increase men’s earnings .

Employed women and men are about equally likely to say they feel a great deal of pressure to support their family financially and to be successful in their jobs and careers, according to the Center’s October survey. But women, and particularly working mothers, are more likely than men to say they feel a great deal of pressure to focus on responsibilities at home.

About half of employed women (48%) report feeling a great deal of pressure to focus on their responsibilities at home, compared with 35% of employed men. Among working mothers with children younger than 18 in the household, two-thirds (67%) say the same, compared with 45% of working dads.

When it comes to supporting their family financially, similar shares of working moms and dads (57% vs. 62%) report they feel a great deal of pressure, but this is driven mainly by the large share of unmarried working mothers who say they feel a great deal of pressure in this regard (77%). Among those who are married, working dads are far more likely than working moms (60% vs. 43%) to say they feel a great deal of pressure to support their family financially. (There were not enough unmarried working fathers in the sample to analyze separately.)

About four-in-ten working parents say they feel a great deal of pressure to be successful at their job or career. These findings don’t differ by gender.

Gender differences in job roles, aspirations

Overall, a quarter of employed U.S. adults say they are currently the boss or one of the top managers where they work, according to the Center’s survey. Another 33% say they are not currently the boss but would like to be in the future, while 41% are not and do not aspire to be the boss or one of the top managers.

Men are more likely than women to be a boss or a top manager where they work (28% vs. 21%). This is especially the case among employed fathers, 35% of whom say they are the boss or one of the top managers where they work. (The varying attitudes between fathers and men without children at least partly reflect differences in marital status and educational attainment between the two groups.)

In addition to being less likely than men to say they are currently the boss or a top manager at work, women are also more likely to say they wouldn’t want to be in this type of position in the future. More than four-in-ten employed women (46%) say this, compared with 37% of men. Similar shares of men (35%) and women (31%) say they are not currently the boss but would like to be one day. These patterns are similar among parents.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published on March 22, 2019. Anna Brown and former Pew Research Center writer/editor Amanda Barroso contributed to an earlier version of this analysis. Here are the questions used in this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology .

What is the gender wage gap in your metropolitan area? Find out with our pay gap calculator

• Gender & Work
• Gender Equality & Discrimination
• Gender Pay Gap
• Gender Roles

Carolina Aragão is a research associate focusing on social and demographic trends at Pew Research Center

Women have gained ground in the nation’s highest-paying occupations, but still lag behind men

Diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, the enduring grip of the gender pay gap, more than twice as many americans support than oppose the #metoo movement, women now outnumber men in the u.s. college-educated labor force, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy