Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Peer review is one of useful and powerful performance measurement process. In Korea, it needs to increase quality of R&D performance, but bibliometric evaluation and lack of peers have opposite effect. We used a system dynamics to describe Korean R&D performance measurement system and ways to increase performance quality. To meet a desired R&D performance quality, increasing fairness and quality of evaluation is needed. Size of peer pool decreased because of the specialization of R&D projects and the Sangpi process both, and it is critical to acquire both fairness and quality. Also, shortening evaluation period affect to R&D performance quality, by causing workloads increase, limiting long-term and innovative R&D projects, and decreasing evaluation quality. Previous evaluation policies do a role like micro-controlling the R&D’s activities, but increasing the size of peer pool and changing evaluation period would make a change to quality and fairness of evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
You et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: