The Journal Impact Factor as a KPI

The Journal Impact Factor as a KPI

The journal impact factor is a measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year. It is used to measure the importance or rank of a journal by calculating the times it's articles are cited.

While originally invented by Eugene Garfield as a tool to help university librarians to decide which journals to purchase, the journal impact factor soon became used as a measure for judging academic success. Since then, the journal impact factor has gained widespread use for evaluation of research, individual scientists, research groups and institutions.

Since P.O. Seglen described already in 1997 “Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research” (British Medical Journal, 314(7079), 497), I want to raise the question “What is necessary to conduct high quality research?”, and focus on the processes necessary for submitting a paper to a journal rather than the final output.

?KPIs - Key Performance Indicators

?Teaching

  • Total Number of Lectures in the Bachelor Studies
  • Total Number of Practical Trainings in the Bachelor Studies
  • Total Number of Seminar in the Bachelor Studies
  • Total Number of Lectures in the Master Studies
  • Total Number of Practical Trainings in the Master Studies
  • Total Number of Seminar in the Master Studies
  • Total Number of PhD students

?People

  • Total Number of Employees
  • Total Number of in-house educated Employees
  • Total Number of Employees from a foreign educational institution
  • Total Number of internal Training Opportunities
  • Total Number of external Training Opportunities
  • Total Number of newly created Positions
  • Total Number of Career Development Opportunities
  • Average Length of Employment

?Machinery & Methods

  • Percentage of State of the Art Machinery (property or access)
  • Percentage of Machinery with a Qualification
  • Percentage of Machinery with Service Contracts
  • Percentage of Processes with a Validation
  • Percentage of Methods with a Validation

?Finance

  • Total Number of Project Grants
  • Total Number of accepted Project Grants
  • Total Number of rejected Project Grants
  • Total Number of accepted Project Grants - Lead Party
  • Total Number of rejected Project Grants - Lead Party
  • Total Revenue of acquired Project Grants
  • Total Revenue of acquired Project Grants - Lead Party
  • Total Revenue of Industry Cooperations
  • Total Revenue of Contract Research

?Network

  • Total Number of Academic Cooperation Partners
  • Total Number of Academic Board Memberships
  • Total Number of Academic International Societies
  • Total Number of Academic National Societies
  • Total Number of Industry Cooperation Partners
  • Total Number of Industry Board Memberships
  • Total Number of Contract Research Orders

?Product

  • Total Number of Publications
  • Total Number of First Author Publications
  • Total Number of Last Author Publications
  • Total Number of Journal Impact Factors
  • Total Number of Journal Impact Factors - First Author
  • Total Number of Journal Impact Factors - Last Author

?Exploitation

  • Total Number of invited Talks
  • Total Number of invited International Talks
  • Total Number of invited National Talks
  • Total Number of invited Poster Presentations
  • Total Number of invited International Poster Presentations
  • Total Number of invited National Poster Presentations
  • Total Number of invited Session Chairs

?Amortization

  • Total Number of granted Patents
  • Total Number of granted Patents - Patent Holder: Employer
  • Total Number of granted Patents - Patent Holder: Employee
  • Total Revenue of granted Patents
  • Total Number of pending Patents
  • Total Number of pending Patents - Patent Holder: Employer
  • Total Number of pending Patents - Patent Holder: Employee

?

Work in Progress

Some may say, “Without the definition of a time period, no KPI listed above makes sense”. I totally agree, but the list above is by far not complete and setting a time period would have added an additional factor of complexity, which at this stage I wanted to avoid. There is also no prioritization at this point. I wanted to share my ideas of KPIs and I would be happy and thankful, if you share your ideas too. So please feel free to make suggestions for important and/ or missing Key Performance Indicators in the comment section or to start a constructive discussion. The results of this Publicly Brain Storming will be shared in another Blog Post.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Roman Gangl的更多文章

  • Benchmarking - Measuring the Quality of Research

    Benchmarking - Measuring the Quality of Research

    The development of an House of Quality requires a lot of identification, classification and rating. Rating by the…

  • A Hollisitc Point of View: Continuous Improvement

    A Hollisitc Point of View: Continuous Improvement

    The continuous improvement process describes a way of thinking that aims to continuously increase value creation with…

    2 条评论
  • Quality Function Deployment - House of Quality

    Quality Function Deployment - House of Quality

    The aim of Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is to transform qualitative customer requirements into quantitative…

  • Interdisciplinarity - A Change of Perspective

    Interdisciplinarity - A Change of Perspective

    After completing my Bachelor and Master Studies in Genetics, I hold now a PhD in Natural Sciences with a strong focus…

  • ARIC - Academic Research Impact Cockpit

    ARIC - Academic Research Impact Cockpit

    Since Academic Research Institutions are the biggest Project Organizations within the Economic Landscape, KPIs seem to…

    2 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了