Research assessment
We evaluate responsibly!
Since signing the (DORA) in 2016, the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥ has been advocating for a more responsible approach to research evaluation. We call for bibliometric indicators to be used strategically, balanced with qualitative assessments and tailored to specific contexts and goals.
We encourage assessors to look beyond journal-based metrics when judging research quality or making key decisions on hiring, promotion, and funding. When used, bibliometric measures should always be thoughtfully applied and supported by qualitative insights, as a part of a broad evaluation.
By embracing these principles, the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥ helps create a research culture that values quality, integrity, and inclusivity, while empowering researchers and strengthening academic excellence.
As an institution, the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥...
- Commits to develop and spread a culture of responsible assessment, based on scientific excellence, equal opportunities and fair academic careers.
- Employs clear evaluation criteria. We tailor our tools and requirements to each assessment, in collaboration with the assessed entity. We combine responsibly quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
- Considers the value and impact of many research outputs, alongside research publications. In our assessments, we take into account all the outcomes listed by the ORCID organization (teaching, collaborations, software, performances etc.)
Find out more about the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥’s research evaluation tools and methods!
Who and what we assess
The ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥ conducts a variety of research assessments at both institutional and individual levels — covering departments, faculties, institutes, researchers, and individual research projects. These assessments are guided by transparent criteria that thoughtfully combine qualitative and quantitative indicators.
Assessment of institutes and departments
The Research Management Office oversees the internal assessment of institutes and departments, in collaboration with the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥’s Quality Assurance and Development (QAD) programme. Our research evaluations help ensure transparency, support strategic planning, and drive continuous improvement. Clear assessments also strengthen the University’s accountability to the public.
At the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥, assessment is performed responsibly, discussing evaluation criteria and tools with the assessed entity. Methods and outcomes can vary depending on the size of the entity being evaluated and the evaluation’s purpose. The research field is also taken into account, since citation practices and data availability differ widely between disciplines, making comparisons across fields inequitable without robust normalization methods. Due to the statistical nature of metrics, using indicators to assess quality for individuals or small groups is considered as highly problematic, particularly when they are the primary basis for rewards and lack supporting information. However, bibliometrics, if contextualised, can be practical for benchmarking the performance of large entities, aiding in policymaking and planning.
Find out more about our institutional assessments!
Assessment of researchers and projects
At the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥, assessments of individual researchers and research projects are primarily conducted by the Research Commission and by the Academic Careers Office. These evaluations follow the standards outlined in the Research Commission Regulations and those set by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), depending on the specific funding program. In collaboration with the SNSF, the University actively supports diverse research outputs and promotes fairness through tools such as narrative CVs.
The University Research Commission is a permanent committee acting on behalf of the Executive Board, in line with the University's academic regulations. It oversees the evaluation of applications for individual and project funding under programs such as UniBE Initiator Grants, UniBE BIND Grants, and UniBE Doc.Mobility. Additionally, it provides strategic advice to the Vice-Rectorate for Research and Innovation and other University committees.
The Academic Careers Office plays a key role in assessing grant proposals at early-career stages. It is also involved in funding programs such as the Fund for the Promotion of Young Researchers, the Initiator Grants, the 120% Care Grant, and the UniBE Doc.Mobility.
Find out more about UniBE funding instruments!
Tips for members of evaluation committees
Following the and the SNSF , UniBE researchers and professors involved in evaluation committees are invited to observe the following recommendations:
Be transparent
Be transparent about the criteria used for your assessment, especially when it comes to hiring, tenure, and promotion decisions.
Be consistent
Ensure consistency by applying the same criteria and standards to all evaluations of the same type, maintaining fairness throughout the process. If you need some guidance on this topic, you can employ the S.C.O.P.E. assessment framework.
Do not measure quality with quantitative indicators
Use quantitative indicators responsibly and contextualise metrics: numbers alone cannot capture the full value or impact of scholarly work. If you need some guidance on this topic, please check out our research assessment methods.
Choose quality over quantity
Prioritize quality over quantity in assessment by valuing the impact and relevance of research over the volume of publications. This approach rewards meaningful contributions that drive knowledge forward.
Recognize the value and impact of all research outputs
Alongside publications, consider a wide range of outputs and impact measures, including datasets and software, artistic performances and industry contributions. Have a look at the list of outcomes published by the ORCID organization!
Be aware of biases and preconceptions
Be mindful of potential biases and preconceptions during the assessment process. Ensure that evaluations are fair, objective, and based on the true merits of the research rather than preconceived notions or assumptions. Need more information about unconscious biases? Discover equitable assessment at the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥!
Advocate against unfair assessment practices
Promote equitable and evidence-based evaluation methods over biases or flawed metrics. Ensure that all research is assessed on its true value.
Tips for candidates under evaluation
Candidates undergoing evaluation at the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥ are assessed according to the policies relevant to their specific funding instruments or assessment categories. Generally, they are encouraged to...
Employ a variety of indicators
Candidates should demonstrate the impact of their work with a variety of outputs. Fair assessment should also consider diverse career paths, interdisciplinary work, and non-traditional achievements.
Be strategic
Candidates should tailor their achievements to their career, to their discipline, to the requirements of the funding instrument they are applying for, and to the reviewers. Keyword is “quality over quantity”. Features such as the “Net academic age” can be used to optimize applications and address questions in advance.
Be clear and specific
Candidates should describe their specific contribution as well as the impact of their work, highlighting what makes them stand out. In case of academic career breaks, they should provide concise and clear reasons for time deductions.
Revise and evaluate their application
Candidates should not forget to carefully revise their application before submitting it, making sure information are up-to-date (e.g. ORCID profile).
The whole academic community of the ´ºÉ«Ö±²¥ is invited to promote fair, transparent, and equitable criteria to ensure that individuals are judged on merit and objective standards rather than discrimination, favoritism, or flawed methodologies.