Evaluating research portfolios, a method and a case1
P. van den Besselaar, A. Khalili, and U. Sandström.
(September 2017)

Evaluating whether a portfolio of funded research projects (of a research council), or a portfolio of research papers (the output of a university) is relevant for science and for society required two-dimensional mapping of the project portfolio: (i) projecting the portfolio on a science map showing how the portfolio fits into and possibly shapes the research fronts, and (ii) projecting the portfolio on a map of societal challenges, showing where the portfolio links to societal problem solving or innovation. This requires evaluating in two different ‘languages’: a technical language relating projects to the research front, and a societal language relating the projects to societal challenges. In this paper, we demonstrate a method for doing so, using the SMS-platform. The advantage is that the method is much less dependent on subjective classifications by single experts or a small group of experts, and that it is rather user-friendly.

URL: https://sti2017.paris/
search on: Google Scholar Microsoft Bing WorldCat BASE

This publication has not been reviewed yet.

rating distribution

average user rating0.0 out of 5.0 based on 0 reviews

Please log in to take part in the discussion (add own reviews or comments).

@conference{vandenbesselaar2017evaluating,
  abstract = {Evaluating whether a portfolio of funded research projects (of a research council), or a
portfolio of research papers (the output of a university) is relevant for science and for society
required two-dimensional mapping of the project portfolio: (i) projecting the portfolio on a
science map showing how the portfolio fits into and possibly shapes the research fronts, and
(ii) projecting the portfolio on a map of societal challenges, showing where the portfolio links
to societal problem solving or innovation. This requires evaluating in two different
‘languages’: a technical language relating projects to the research front, and a societal
language relating the projects to societal challenges. In this paper, we demonstrate a method
for doing so, using the SMS-platform. The advantage is that the method is much less
dependent on subjective classifications by single experts or a small group of experts, and that
it is rather user-friendly.},
  added-at = {2017-10-04T15:26:00.000+0200},
  author = {van den Besselaar, Peter and Khalili, Ali and Sandström, Ulf},
  biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2effcafb106633b61020be16d79ffba9d/alikhalili},
  booktitle = {The 2017 STI (Science, Technology and Innovation indicators) conference},
  interhash = {2188d09aea3d79b2564127e246f0220b},
  intrahash = {effcafb106633b61020be16d79ffba9d},
  keywords = {ali1k khalili myown risisProject semantic web},
  month = {September},
  timestamp = {2017-10-04T15:26:00.000+0200},
  title = {Evaluating research portfolios, a method and a case1},
  url = {https://sti2017.paris/},
  venue = {Paris, France},
  year = 2017
}

%0 Generic
%1 vandenbesselaar2017evaluating
%A van den Besselaar, Peter
%A Khalili, Ali
%A Sandström, Ulf
%B The 2017 STI (Science, Technology and Innovation indicators) conference
%D 2017
%K ali1k khalili myown risisProject semantic web
%T Evaluating research portfolios, a method and a case1
%U https://sti2017.paris/
%X Evaluating whether a portfolio of funded research projects (of a research council), or a
portfolio of research papers (the output of a university) is relevant for science and for society
required two-dimensional mapping of the project portfolio: (i) projecting the portfolio on a
science map showing how the portfolio fits into and possibly shapes the research fronts, and
(ii) projecting the portfolio on a map of societal challenges, showing where the portfolio links
to societal problem solving or innovation. This requires evaluating in two different
‘languages’: a technical language relating projects to the research front, and a societal
language relating the projects to societal challenges. In this paper, we demonstrate a method
for doing so, using the SMS-platform. The advantage is that the method is much less
dependent on subjective classifications by single experts or a small group of experts, and that
it is rather user-friendly.

BibSonomy

Evaluating research portfolios, a method and a case1
P. van den Besselaar, A. Khalili, and U. Sandström.
(September 2017)

Tags

Users

Comments and Reviews

Cite this publication

BibSonomy

Evaluating research portfolios, a method and a case1P. van den Besselaar, A. Khalili, and U. Sandström. (September 2017)

Tags

Users

Comments and Reviews

Cite this publication

Evaluating research portfolios, a method and a case1
P. van den Besselaar, A. Khalili, and U. Sandström.
(September 2017)