[Loet Leydesdorff]

Dear David,

Why don't you make the division? We once did it for the major Dutch
universities -- unfortunately the paper is in Dutch at
http://www.leydesdorff.net/uva -- and to our surprise the Free University
came on top for the social sciences and the humanities.

I suppose that input figures (fte) are easily available for the UK, at
different levels. Output data can easily be gathered at the Web-of-Science
using postal codes. If the results are different from the RAE, it is worth
publishing.

With best wishes,


Loet

________________________________
Loet Leydesdorff
Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR),
Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam.
Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-20- 525 3681;
loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Watkins
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:09 AM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: [SIGMETRICS]
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> RAE and Efficiency
>
>
> It does not need a switch to metrics-based analysis to
> generate a Matthew Effect in the UK RAE. It already exists,
> because prior research funding is considered an 'output'
> rather than an 'input'; hence one clear reason for the strong
> correlation between prior funding and RAE rank.
>
> The logic of this is baffling (except as a political power
> play). Any switch to a more metrics-based approach to
> 'quality', 'impact' etc. opens up the possibility of using
> the research funding element to arrive at an efficiency
> measure by the simple expedient of dividing the chosen rating
> through by the resource input (in particular, by the previous
> RAE funding, but since all outputs are normally taken into
> consideration, so should all input funding).
>
> That would really level up the playing field - which is why
> it is never done - and a reason why metrics-based approaches
> are really contested by the winners in the current system.
>
> As a taxpayer, I am at least as interested in the relative
> efficiency with which two similar departments have used my
> largesse as in the relative peer esteem. One suspects that
> outside the few areas where there are genuine economies of
> scale or scope in research ('Big Science'), there is a strong
> Pareto effect in operation here, with small amounts of
> funding at the individual, departmental or institutional
> level producing most of the benefits, and the marginal
> advantage of increasing concentration being vanishingly small.
>
>
>
>
> DW
>
> ************************************************
> Professor David Watkins
> Postgraduate Research Centre
> Southampton Business School
> East Park Terrace
> Southampton SO14 0RH
>
> David.Watkins at solent.ac.uk
>  023 80 319610 (Tel)
> +44 23 80 31 96 10 (Tel)
>
> 02380 33 26 27 (fax)
> +44 23 80 33 26 27 (fax)
>