Anatomy of Research Performance from a Bottom-Up Approach: Examination of Researchers’ Perspective

Abstract

Performance-based research policies and programmes have fundamentally altered both organisational and individual behaviours and expectations, putting immense pressure on researchers. The soundness of research, originality, valorisation potential, and societal and economic impacts are highly valued and expected characteristics of research. Yet, our understanding of the effects of various systemic and organisational factors on research performance is limited. In an exploratory, single-country case, this paper aimed to develop and examine different models of research performance as perceived by researchers themselves using a large cross-disciplinary sample of 553 researchers from 72 public research organisations in Romania. A pre-tested questionnaire was self-administered online, comprising seven scales: (1) recruitment and selection, (2) research recognition and value, (3) participation in research projects and teams, (4) work incentives, (5) job payment and salary, (6) career development opportunities, and (7) leadership effectiveness. Maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimators were used to test three structural models: (M1) mono-factor; (M2) intercorrelated dimensions, and (M3) the dimensions are indicators of a general construct. Additionally, a path analysis was carried out to study the relationships among the dimensions. We found that M2 and M3 fit the empirical data better. The results showed that career development programmes and opportunities gain centrality in achieving research performance by directly influencing participation and research projects and teams and mediating the effect of job payment. Revealingly, powerful work incentives within research organisations are international mobilities or appreciation awards. When informing evidence-based policies, the models we propose could serve the goal of improving research performance through talent development as the main proxy.

Specificity of the Motivation for High-Quality Publications in Russia

“… On the ranking of motivational drivers:  In the Bulgarian and Croatian researchers' rankings (references [8], [29]), there was one eponymous motivational driver of the same rank as in the Russian one.  No eponymous motivational drivers of the same rank were found in the rankings of Russian and Romanian (reference [30]) researchers.…”

“…), incl. references [8], [29] and [30]. These studies concern the motivational drivers for high-quality publications in post-socialist countries and are detailed enough to allow comparison.…”

“…These studies concern the motivational drivers for high-quality publications in post-socialist countries and are detailed enough to allow comparison. More specifically, they refer to the following countries/universities: reference [29] -Croatia, [30] -Romania, and [8] -one Bulgarian university. The choice of post-socialist countries as a comparative basis is due to the similar socioeconomic situation and problems with Russia after 1990, incl.…”

“…The second direction concerns the motivational drivers of the Russian researcher stakeholder with the following specifics: [29] Empirical study on Romania [30] Empirical study on Bulgaria [8] This study of Russia [18], [21], [22], [25], [27], [28]), incentive payments ([15], [17], [21], [22], [25], [26], [27]), scientific interest ([16], [19], [22], [23], [25], [27], [28])…”

“… On the content of motivational drivers:  With 2 similarities in the highest-ranked motivational drivers per empirical study ( [8], [29], [30]), Russian researchers were equally far from researchers in each of the three postsocialist countries on this indicator. If we comment on these results on behalf of the three countries, the findings are exactly the opposite, as each of these countries has 2 similarities with Russia out of 3 possible.…”