The Experts below are selected from a list of 298083 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Barry Bozeman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
robotic bureaucracy and administrative burden what are the effects of universities computer automated Research Grants management systems
Research Policy, 2020Co-Authors: Barry Bozeman, Jan Youtie, Jiwon JungAbstract:Abstract Our paper seeks to understand effects of computerized approaches to university Research Grants and contracts management, especially impacts on administrative burden. Ours is a multi-method paper, including interviews with academic Researchers but focuses chiefly on participant-observer Research, using hundreds of our own emails from two projects located at two different universities. We find that robotic emails have complex effects and that their utility pertains to Researchers' familiarity with the systems and compliance requirements, the clarity of administrative requests, the extent and location of staff support, and the interaction of personal work habits with system requirements. We provide suggestions for improving automated Research administration.
-
using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of nsf Research Grants with Research center funding
Research Evaluation, 2002Co-Authors: Mónica Gaughan, Barry BozemanAbstract:While traditional Grants remain central in US federal support of academic scientists and engineers, the role of multidisciplinary NSF Centers is growing. Little is known about how funding through these Centers affects scientific output or (as is an NSF aim) increases academic collaboration with industry. This paper tests the use of CVs to examine how Center funding affects Researchers' publication rates and their obtaining industry Grants. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.
-
Using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of NSF Research Grants with Research center funding
Research Evaluation, 2002Co-Authors: Mónica Gaughan, Barry BozemanAbstract:Aunque las subvenciones tradicionales siguen siendo fundamentales en los Estados Unidos el apoyo federal de científicos académicos e ingenieros, el papel de los Centros NSF multidisciplinarios está creciendo. Poco se sabe acerca de cómo la financiación a través de estos Centros afecta a la producción científica o (como es un objetivo NSF) aumenta la colaboración académica con la industria. En este trabajo se pone a prueba el uso de currículos para examinar cómo la financiación del Centro afecta las tasas de publicación de los investigadores y sus donaciones de la industria obtención. Encontramos que los CV son realmente útiles, pero algunas formas de proceder a su recogida trabajamos mucho mejor que otros, y que los investigadores que obtengan subvenciones Center son más propensos a obtener subvenciones de la industria también, lo que sugiere que se está cumpliendo este objetivo NSF. No encontramos que los Centros de mejorar las tasas de publicación.
Mónica Gaughan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of nsf Research Grants with Research center funding
Research Evaluation, 2002Co-Authors: Mónica Gaughan, Barry BozemanAbstract:While traditional Grants remain central in US federal support of academic scientists and engineers, the role of multidisciplinary NSF Centers is growing. Little is known about how funding through these Centers affects scientific output or (as is an NSF aim) increases academic collaboration with industry. This paper tests the use of CVs to examine how Center funding affects Researchers' publication rates and their obtaining industry Grants. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.
-
Using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of NSF Research Grants with Research center funding
Research Evaluation, 2002Co-Authors: Mónica Gaughan, Barry BozemanAbstract:Aunque las subvenciones tradicionales siguen siendo fundamentales en los Estados Unidos el apoyo federal de científicos académicos e ingenieros, el papel de los Centros NSF multidisciplinarios está creciendo. Poco se sabe acerca de cómo la financiación a través de estos Centros afecta a la producción científica o (como es un objetivo NSF) aumenta la colaboración académica con la industria. En este trabajo se pone a prueba el uso de currículos para examinar cómo la financiación del Centro afecta las tasas de publicación de los investigadores y sus donaciones de la industria obtención. Encontramos que los CV son realmente útiles, pero algunas formas de proceder a su recogida trabajamos mucho mejor que otros, y que los investigadores que obtengan subvenciones Center son más propensos a obtener subvenciones de la industria también, lo que sugiere que se está cumpliendo este objetivo NSF. No encontramos que los Centros de mejorar las tasas de publicación.
Peter Van Den Besselaar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the selection of scientific talent in the allocation of Research Grants
Higher Education Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Pleun Van Arensbergen, Peter Van Den BesselaarAbstract:Career Grants are an important instrument for selecting and stimulating the next generation of leading Researchers. Earlier Research has mainly focused on the relation between past performance and success. In this study we investigate how the selection process takes place. More specifically, we investigate which quality dimensions (of the proposal, of the Researcher and societal relevance) dominate. We also study which phases in the process (peer review, committee review, interview) are dominant in the evaluation process. Finally, we investigate whether differences between disciplines are visible. The analysis of our data set, consisting of the reviews of 898 grant applications, shows that talent has different dimensions and therefore is not obvious. The evaluation of talent was found to be contextual, although there were only small differences between disciplines. Unlike the interviews with the applicants, the external peer reviews hardly influence the decision-making on grant allocation. The notion of talent was found to be the least evident in the social sciences and humanities.
Christoph Grimpe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Emerging Technologies and Prior Exploration: The Role of Incumbents in Research Grant Competitions
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017Co-Authors: Anders Ørding Olsen, Wolfgang Sofka, Christoph GrimpeAbstract:Technological change and its consequences are a major challenge for the management of incumbent firms. We study how incumbents can actively participate in shaping Research in emerging technologies. We study partnerships, so-called search consortia, competing for resources in Research grant competitions and explore the conditions under which incumbent involvement helps consortia to obtain Research Grants. We integrate theory from incumbency Research into a model of coordinated exploration and evaluation of alternatives. We hypothesize that incumbents legitimize search consortia, thereby increasing their odds of receiving funding, but that these effects are weaker if Research Grants require radically new technologies and incumbents lack a demonstrated track record of broad technological exploration. We support these hypotheses by analyzing 1,003 consortia competing for Research Grants in the energy area of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development of the European Union. Our ...
-
extramural Research Grants and scientists funding strategies beggars cannot be choosers
Research Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Christoph GrimpeAbstract:Although competitive funding of public Research has been characterised as providing output incentives that raise efficiency and productivity, we know very little about whether the quality of a scientist's Research is in fact the primary award criterion on which funding bodies base their grant decision. This paper provides insights into scientists’ strategies for obtaining project-based Research funding in the presence of multiple funding opportunities. It draws a distinction between four types of Grants, including the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP6), government, foundation, and industry Grants. Based on a sample of more than 800 scientists at universities and public Research institutes in Germany, the results indicate that scientist productivity measured in terms of publication and patent stock is a statistically significant determinant only for obtaining foundation and industry Grants while the award of an FP6 or government grant is influenced by other characteristics. The results further show that the different Grants are not complementary, i.e. scientists specialise in certain Grants. In this respect, the analysis informs science, technology and innovation policy about potential discrepancies between policy rhetoric, stipulated award criteria, and actual funding outcomes which makes it possible to fine-tune the debate on how public Research should be financed.
-
scientific excellence and extramural Research Grants beggars can t be choosers
2010Co-Authors: Christoph GrimpeAbstract:Several reviews and impact assessment studies have concluded that the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP6) succeeded in fostering scientific excellence and attracting the “A Team” in public science. However, these studies typically fail to contrast their findings with the variety of funding opportunities available to public science. Based on a sample of more than 1,000 scientists at universities and public Research institutes in Germany, this paper finds that highly credentialed faculty typically chose other funding opportunities than FP6, for example Grants from science foundations or industry. In fact, FP6 only seems to be attractive for the scientific “B Team” that works rather application oriented. The findings further indicate that an FP6 participation substitutes for other grant programmes while the latter are complementary to each other. If this is intended to be changed other funding priorities will be required, for example smaller team sizes, less predefined Research topics, a reduced administrative burden, and a higher quality of the peer review system.
K M H Maessen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comment to the article by van arensbergen and van den besselaar the selection of scientific talent in the allocation of Research Grants
Higher Education Policy, 2012Co-Authors: K M H MaessenAbstract:The article entitled ‘The selection of scientific talent in the allocation of Research Grants’ by van Arensbergen and van den Besselaar published in Higher Education Policy 25/3 (2012) is based on Research that both Researchers carried out on behalf of The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research. In this comment, we want to address several conclusions and statements in the article: On which information are evaluations based? Are there no clear boundaries of excellence? What skills are needed in the interview? Is the referee comment important for the decision on an application? And is the assumption that a strong correlation between reviewer scores and committee scores is a measure for the evidence of talent correct?
