The incentive system of academia must reflect the wide range of activities that academics undertake.
The problem
The academic career pathway is almost exclusively built upon publishing and acquiring funding. Academics are promoted based on where they have published, how much they’ve published and how many grants they’ve secured. This fails to account for teaching, “service” activities and, in some cases, even ability. This results in a stifled system, reluctant to change and develop.
We must move on from outdated assessments and thinking. Thanks to efforts from organisations such as DORA and CoARA this is slowly changing.
The solution
Expanding what institutions and funders recognise when assessing researchers is a vital component to improving the culture of academia. This is also essential to move beyond the traditional article and poor proxies that are eroding trust in research.
One clear action that institutions can take immediately is to implement a policy of only promoting beyond a certain leadership level if those applying have demonstrated and evidenced record of engaging in positive practices, regardless of standing or research/grant prowess.
Our current efforts
Expand incentives & rewarded activities
Convene stakeholders & working groups
Formal policies for promoting those with demonstrated skills
Resources
Frequently Asked Questions
Why do the current reward & incentive structures need to change?
Current incentive systems emphasise traditional outputs like publications and grant income, which can undervalue teaching, teamwork, mentorship, and community engagement. They can also lead to excessive workloads, unhealthy competition, and lack of transparency or consistency in promotion and recognition. As universities adapt, there is an increasing push for frameworks that reward a broader range of academic contributions, recognize individual strengths, value collaboration, and provide clear, transparent, and equitable career paths.
How are institutions addressing these issues?
Some institutions are overhauling reward structures to better balance research, teaching, and service, reflect a more diverse set of achievements, and ensure inclusive, fair recognition processes. This includes annual reviews by departmental panels, new criteria tied to behaviours and values, and expanded opportunities for professional development and leadership recognition
Who decides academic rewards and promotions?
Academic promotions and rewards are typically determined by a series of panels and committees that include senior academic managers, heads of department or school, and representatives from relevant disciplines. These panels assess applications using transparent criteria and consider supporting statements from referees and supervisors
Are there pathways for promotion based on teaching only?
Yes, many institutions recognise separate career pathways (such as teaching-focused or research-focused) and have dedicated criteria and promotion routes for these tracks, allowing recognition for a broad range of academic contributions
Why is changing rewards and incentives difficult?
This kind of change requires those who’ve benefited from the traditional structures to recognise the issues and actively work towards change.
What is the difference between DORA & CoARA?
DORA is a set of guiding principles and recommendations for research assessment reform, while CoARA is a slightly more action-oriented coalition focused on putting such reforms into practice at an international, institutional level. Both efforts have significant overlap.
Join Us!
Join our community, sign up to our newsletter or collaborate with us
Rippling Ideas 