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

About Wilfred Mijnhardt
RMIMR is my virtual playground, a place to reflect on issues from my professional context, my job as Policy Director at Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (RSM). RSM is the international university based business school at Erasmus University Rotterdam. More info here: www.rsm.nl Here is my list of relevant publications on the topic of my RMIMR weblog: http://www.mendeley.com/collections/694621/RMIMR-Repository/ The rss feed for my RMIMR collection is here: http://www.mendeley.com/collections/rss/694621/ Here is my other weblog on impact of research: http://www.scoop.it/t/dualimpact

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

RSS Business School News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Locations of Site Visitors
%d bloggers like this: