Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lessons from the Study

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Performance Management at Universities

Part of the book series: Public Sector Organizations ((PSO))

  • 274 Accesses

Abstract

The practical and theoretical lessons from the study are summarized in this chapter. What can policymakers learn from the Danish case? The paradoxes and contradictory goals that may arise when a performance-based research funding system such as the BRI is introduced are discussed. The second set of lessons is those relevant for university management, in particular related to the problems of using systems like the Bibliometric Research Indicator vis-à-vis individuals. The chapter concludes with a short discussion of lessons for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literature

  • Aagaard, Kaare 2018. “Performance-Based Research Funding in Denmark: The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model”. Journal of Data and Information Science 3(4): 19–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmeche, Claus. 2009. “Mareridt, damage control eller forskningsrelevante kvalitetskriterier?” Notat om faggruppernes forbehold overfor den bibliometriske forskningsindikator efter niveaudelingsprocessen og indtastning af tidskriftlisterne pr. 15/9-2009. https://static-curis.ku.dk/portal/files/198723628/Faggruppernes_forbehold_v3.pdf. Accessed January 31, 2019.

  • Esarey, Justin. 2017. “Does Peer Review Identify the Best Papers? A Simulation Study of Editors, Reviewers, and the Scientific Publication Process”. PS: Political Science & Politics 50(4): 963–969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, Jochen, and Grit Laudel. 2016. “Governing Science. How Science Policy Shapes Research Content”. European Journal of Sociology 57(1): 117–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, Jochen, Thomas H. Spurling, and Linda Butler. 2004. “Intraorganisational Evaluation: Are There ‘Least Evaluable Units’?” Research Evaluation 13(1): 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouritzen, Poul Erik, Niels Opstrup, and Pernille Bak Pedersen. 2018. En fremmed kommer til byen. Ti år med den bibliometriske forskningsindikator. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterloh, Margit. 2010. “Governance by Numbers. Does It Really Work in Research?” Analyse & Kritik 2: 267–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterloh, Margit, and Alfred Kieser. 2015. “Double-Blind Peer Review: How to Slaughter a Sacred Cow”, pp. 307–325 in Isabel Welpe, Jutta Wollersheim, Stefanie Ringelhan, and Margit Osterloh (Eds.) Incentives and Performance—Governance of Research Organizations. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, Laurence J. 2012. “Interorganizational Relations and Policy Implementation”, pp. 292–304 in B. Guy Peters and Jon Pierre (Eds.) The Sage Handbook of Public Administration. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Retningslinjer. 2017. Retningslinjer for forskningsregistrering til Den Bibliometriske Forskningsindikator. https://ufm.dk/forskning-og-innovation/statistik-og-analyser/den-bibliometriske-forskningsindikator/BFIs-regler/retningslinjer_for_forskningsregistrering_til_bfi.pdf. Accessed November 21, 2017.

  • Sauder, Michael, and Wendy Nelson Espeland. 2009. “The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change”. American Sociological Review 74(1): 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivertsen, Gunnar, and Jesper Schneider. 2012. Evaluering av den bibliometriske forskningsindikator. NIFU Rapport 17, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, Nicholas. 2016. Building on Success and Learning from Experience. An Independent Review of the Research Excellence Framework. Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, London, UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-excellence-framework-review. Accessed February 1, 2019.

  • Weaver, R. Kent. 2015. “Getting People to Behave: Research Lessons for Policy Makers”. Public Administration Review 75(6): 806–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, Paul, et al. 2015. The Metric Tide: Literature Review (Supplementary Report I to the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management). HEFCE. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.1.5066.3520.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

    Poul Erik Mouritzen

  2. Department of Political Science and Public Management, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Niels Opstrup

Authors
  1. Poul Erik Mouritzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Niels Opstrup
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Poul Erik Mouritzen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mouritzen, P.E., Opstrup, N. (2020). Lessons from the Study. In: Performance Management at Universities. Public Sector Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21325-1_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation