Excellent science requires excellent management!

The European University Association (EUA) has just published another quality report on Managing the University Community. The report is editedeuareport2007 by Bernadette Conraths and Annamaria Trusso and explores Good Practice in several institutions. Page 41-63 contains an excellent contribution on research management.

It describes a model for science management. and it states:

“Science management implies management for science, not management of science. It is science that determines contents and methods, while management sees to the effi ciency and effectiveness of processes. The optimisation of processes could result in a potential increase of 20% in performance which cannot be forfeited for science.” (p.41)

“In management, structures and processes evolve as organisational refl exes to the formation and
implementation of strategies. In the government system, it is the rules that dominate the goals, whereas in
the private system, the goals dominate the rules. Another aspect is that in the government system,
orderliness dominates cost effectiveness. Both aspects originate from a deeply rooted culture which resistant
to change. After an institution has gone through a strategy development process and arrived at a result – for example
in the shape of a guiding model – management is then faced with the task of implementation. In science,
the management process consists mainly of the following tasks:

  1. Strategy planning (where to?)
  2. Planning at subject level (what?)
  3. Financial planning (how much? when?)
  4. Staff planning, staff management (what qualities? what quantities?, what incentives?)
  5. Investment planning (what apparatus? For whom? From whom?)
  6. Innovation planning (what benefi t? For whom?)
  7. Communication (who has to say what to whom? Who has to ask whom what?)
  8. Execution (who does what by when: responsibilities?)
  9. Evaluation (external evaluation of quality and relevance)
  10. Cost control (what information is crucial to decision-making, and who can provide it for whom?)
  11. Control/revision (have the rules been observed, with what consequences?)
  12. Quality assurance (suffi cient quality? Certifi cation?)” (p.43)
Advertisements

Top 20 economists NL according to Hirsch index

In a recent issue of the dutch ESB journal, Albert Jolink updates the top 20 economists in the Netherlands and used the Hirsch index to do this.esb top 20

ESB has a long tradition of ranking dutch economists. This new one reshuffels the top to some extend. (latest version used here, dated march 2007)

The top 20 looks like this:

NL top 20

Reflections on Google Scholar and Hirsch index

Anne Will Harzing reflects on these citation developments form the perspective of the business and management field. Anne WillShe matches these sources with the Publish or Perish software. This website is one of the soources very relevant to stay in touch with. Two new white papers were added: Reflections on Google Scholar and Reflectionson the h-index. These papers discuss the validity, assumptions, and limitationsof the underlying sources and methods used by Publish or Perish.

[http://www.harzing.com/pop_gs.htm]
[http://www.harzing.com/pop_hindex.htm]
[http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm]

RSS Business School News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Locations of Site Visitors

Altmetric Related stuf

if(typeof(AltmetricWidget) !== 'undefined'){ window.AltmetricWidget489 = new AltmetricWidget("AltmetricWidget489"); }}

%d bloggers like this: