Research evaluation per discipline: a peer-review method and its outcomes

TL;DR

This paper presents a peer-review evaluation method for research disciplines at VUB, which enhances research quality, informs management decisions, and provides insights for policy development through systematic and flexible assessments.

Contribution

It introduces a systematic peer-review evaluation approach for research disciplines, demonstrating its impact on research quality, management strategies, and policy insights at VUB.

Findings

Improved research quality and visibility

Enhanced research management strategies

Support for policy decision-making

Abstract

This paper describes the method for ex-post peer review evaluation per research discipline used at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and summarizes the outcomes obtained from it. The method produces pertinent advice and triggers responses - at the level of the individual researcher, the research team and the university's research management - for the benefit of research quality, competitivity and visibility. Imposed reflection and contacts during and after the evaluation procedure modify the individual researcher's attitude, improve the research teams' strategies and allow for the extraction of general recommendations that are used as discipline-dependent guidelines in the university's research management. The deep insights gained in the different research disciplines and the substantial data sets on their research, support the university management in its policy decisions and in building policy instruments. Moreover, the results are used as a basis for comparison with other assessments, leading to a better understanding of the possibilities and limitations of different evaluation processes. The peer review method can be applied systematically in a pluri-annual cycle of research discipline evaluations to build up a complete overview, or it can be activated on an ad hoc basis for a particular discipline, based on demands from research teams or on strategic or policy arguments.