The aim of this project is to find out whether and how evaluation in hierarchically organized universities changes the contents of research. The establishment of evaluation is a basic process in the transition to hierarchical governance in universities since it provides information about units which is needed in order to govern. In Germany both governance practices are currently emerging.

Numerous studies lead to the assumption that research financing based on evaluation can influence the contents of research thereby producing different knowledge than would have been produced under other conditions. Such a change in research contents would be a grave unintended consequence of this governance model, the goal of which should be primarily the promotion of quality without influencing the choice of contents thematically.

This project makes following contributions:

1.  It develops a typology of the kinds of institutional micro-environments which emerge through the systematic application of evaluation-based research financing on all levels of a hierarchical self-governance model.

2.  It identifies the effects of particular scientific areas on the range of activities of scientists in these micro-environments.

3.  It identifies conscious and unconscious adaptive strategies of scientists and the resulting changes in the production of knowledge, and

4.  It formulates general causal mechanisms behind the influencing of research contents through evaluation-based funding of research.

This study is carried out as a series of comparative case studies using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. The goal is to identify institutional conditions and their perception by scientists as well as their reactions to what they perceive.

The first series of case studies examines the connection between situation, research decisions of the scientists and the knowledge which is produced in approximately 30 Australian research groups. Bibliometric analyses, guided interviews, and analyses of context information are used. The case studies provide an overview of variations in governance systems as well as research funding practices and of the reactions of the scientists to them. Research groups have been chosen from all important areas in science and from several different universities in order to provide a representative sample of governance structures in various disciplines.

On the basis of these case studies the study has been expanded in two ways. First, comparable case studies in Germany are examined using the analytic concepts of the Australian study. Second, the results with respect to changes in the production of knowledge are enhanced using ethnographic observations of adaptive behavior.

 

Duration: 1.06.2004 – 31.12.2007

 

Further reading

- Gläser, Jochen / Laudel, Grit (2007): »Evaluation without Evaluators: The impact of funding formulae on Australian university research.« In: Richard Whitley / Kate Barker/ Jochen Gläser Hg.): The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems. Yearbook Sociology of the Sciences 2007, Dordrecht. [im Erscheinen]

- Lange, Stefan (2007): »The Basic State of Research in Germany: Conditions of Knowledge Production Pre-Evaluation.« In: Richard Whitley / Kate Barker/ Jochen Gläser Hg.): The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems. Yearbook Sociology of the Sciences 2007, Dordrecht. [im Erscheinen]

- Lange, Stefan / Schimank, Uwe (2007): »Zwischen Konvergenz und Pfadabhängigkeit: New Public Management in den Hochschulsystemen fünf ausgewählter OECD-Länder.« In: Katharina Holzinger / Helge Joergens/ Christoph Knill (Hg.): Transfer, Diffusion und Konvergenz von Politiken, Sonderheft der Politischen Vierteljahresschrift, Wiesbaden, S. 522-548.