NEW ZEALAND: Research performance moves worry union

The next assessment of research in New Zealand's tertiary education sector is three years away but preparations for the event by some institutions already have the country's university staff union worried.

The Performance Based Research Fund will be worth about $250 million (US$164 million) a year to participating degree-granting institutions by the time of the 2012 evaluation of research outputs.

The exercise will determine not only the allocation of 60% of the fund but also bragging rights as universities jockey to record top placings overall or in particular subjects.

The high stakes nature of the exercise was reinforced recently when it emerged the University of Canterbury was planning to fine its colleges $40,000 a year if they had more low-performing researchers than agreed.

Just weeks earlier, Victoria University of Wellington ran into strife with staff over letters suggesting academics were expected to conduct research at a level that would normally attract a B grading - the second highest.

Tertiary Education Union President Tom Ryan said the union was concerned about the implied message that universities would get rid of staff whose research was rated too lowly to attract PBRF funding.

"We're not objecting to accountability but the PBRF is not supposed to be about accountability. It is supposed to be a funding regime," Ryan said.

He agreed the latest moves indicated an increase in universities' use of the PBRF as a performance management tool, a practice that was strongly criticised in an independent review of the system last year.

"Universities should have their own robust systems for measuring research outputs," he said.

Though New Zealand universities have worked hard to improve their standings in the PBRF, Canterbury's move to fine under-performing divisions is unprecedented. Vice-chancellor Dr Rod Carr wrote to staff explaining the university's managers would agree with each college how many staff it could "carry" who had R gradings in the PBRF - R being the lowest grading and attracting no funding.

"Colleges which hold more than planned numbers of research inactive staff following the outcome of the next PBRF round will make an additional contribution to the central office of $40,000 per annum (i.e. $200,000 over five years)," he wrote.

"The rationale for this approach is accountability and incentive to address the hard choices," Carr wrote to staff. He said it recognised that carrying more research-inactive staff than planned represented a loss of funding and a cost to the entire university. It also represented a risk to the overall reputation of the university - not just the college carrying the inactive staff member.

* John Gerritsen is editor of New Zealand Education Review.

John.Gerritsen@uw-news.com