Why draw lots? Funder motivations for using partial randomisation to allocate research grants.

Background The strengths and weaknesses of peer review in grant allocation continue to be a hot topic, especially with the rise of agentic AI in the formulation of grant applications. Expert judgement is at the heart of research funding processes. However, interventions which militate against the egregious burden of peer review, and the limitations of judgement, are being sought more keenly by funders and researchers. One such intervention is the use of random selection. The method has been trialled by a number of funders, but the organisational motivations for its use have until now, not been explored empirically. This qualitative study aims to address this evidence gap. Methods This study is part of a collaborative research initiative between research funders, technologists and researchers ‘The Research on Research Institute’ (RoRI). Six funding organisations that either planned or had implemented the use of partial randomisation took part. Eleven individual in-depth interviews took place in Autumn 2021 with practitioners and senior managers. A thematic analysis was carried out, beginning with a-priori codes generated during the interviews in a listing and ranking elicitation exercise. Findings Three overarching themes: motivating factors; restraining factors; and reflection in practice. The key driver for participants was fairness, including fairer decision making, and perceived fairness. Other important drivers were dealing with the ‘grey zone’ where applications are indistinguishable, and ensuring a diversity of topics and fields are funded. Implications The study provides baseline data on the organisational motivations and challenges experienced by research funders in the use of partial randomisation. The study reports on the forerunners of partial randomisation use. The benefits of these initial projects go beyond the organisations involved and have stimulated conversations within the funding community and wider research system about the reality of peer review in research funding processes and the opportunities to take actions.