Broadening the meaning of ‘the academic’

In this idea, assessments would broaden what they count as academic research - assessing more and different types of research. The objective would be to move away from pre-defined, narrow definition of what a researcher is towards a broader and more realistic understanding of the diverse skills, roles, outputs, and processes that are essential for a functional research system.
Level 0
Aim: Value process
Aim: Diversity
Aim: Collaboration
Aim: Alternative questions
Aim: Bias mitigation
Aim: Recognition
Aim: Inclusivity
Target: Academic institution
Target: Funder
Target: Scholarly association
Target: Research group
Target: Individual scholar
CoARA Commitment 1
CoARA Commitment 6
Contributor

Experiments in Assessment WG

Publication date

April 9, 2026

Updated

April 20, 2026

WarningObjectives and potential outcome

This idea aims to build a more realistic, all encompassing view of what it means to be a researcher. This will eventually:
- Build a more realistic overview of the diversity of work, skills, and profiles needed for a healthy research system
- Promote and justify the value of diversity in research systems
- Enable researchers and research staff to be recognised for activities that truly advance knowledge and science, rather than be stuck in a conflict between elements that advance their career and elements that advance knowledge and science.

Research domains

This idea mostly applies to individual assessment or achievements assessment (i.e., promotion, hiring, personal profile assessment in grant funding, etc.).

Context and considerations

This idea can refer to broader types of research that are valued in assessments, as well as to a broader understanding of the diversity of skills, roles, and achievements necessary for research to advance. This may include valuing practice-based work, arts outputs, community scholarship, logistical and staff work and making clear that these are also essential in contributing to research.

At an individual level, this could mean redefining the roles and responsibilities and the meaning of what it is to be a researcher or an academic. In practice, this would imply changing criteria, promotion/hiring guidelines, as well as elements, achievements, and ‘outputs’ submitted to assessments. It may also mean a change of who is in the assessment committee to diversify the types of elements that are recognised and valued.

Challenges and mitigations

Challenge: Changing the meaning of ‘the researcher’ – or of ‘good research’ – requires a profound cultural change, and is likely to yield resistence among research communities.
Mitigation: It is crucial to define what a researcher – or what good research – really is with research communities, rather than impose a new pre-defined definition. This is a crucial step that will require true immersion, dialogue, and input seeking from the community so that the new models are developed bottom up and not imposed top-town.

Evaluating success

Relevant resources and literature

This section includes resources, literature, and reports relevant to this specific experimental idea.

Templates from funders and institutions

Case examples and literature

The Position paper Room for everyone’s talent from the Dutch Recognition and Reward Programme offers a different way to look at what an academic is, allowning academic staff to decide how they wish to invest their efforts between a number of different elements (Education, Research, Impact, Leadership, and where applicable Patient Care).

The The Norwegian Career Assessment Matrix (NOR-CAM) and the Finnish Career Assessment Matrix (FIN-CAM) follow a similar trajectory, aiming to recognise a broader diversity of competencies, results, and achievements as merits.

Other resources

Background reading: Aubert Bonn N, Pinxten W (2021) Advancing science or advancing careers? Researchers’ opinions on success indicators. PLOS ONE 16(2): e0243664. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243664

Case Studies or Implementation Examples