Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper reviews changes in New Zealand universities since the introduction of the Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF) in 2003, and evaluates changes in relation to the stated objectives. This stocktake of research findings is in part a response to the official report of the Review Panel, which made no attempt to review evidence of performance. A key objective was to achieve an improvement in research quality. It is suggested that improvements have been related closely to the incentives created by the scheme, and achieved by considerable staff turnover. The present stocktake of the changed nature of universities and the details of the evaluation process suggests that substantial simplifications could usefully be made while maintaining incentives that are at the heart of any PBRF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Buckle et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: