Research Management Systems as an Evolutionary Backwater

A Management System for Australian University Research Quality Framework Data
  • Arthur Tatnall
  • Bill Davey
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP – The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 292)

Abstract

Since 2004 the former Australian Government had been working on developing some means of measuring the quality of research from Australian universities. A recent change of Government has meant that the implementation of a Research Quality Framework (RFQ) in the form proposed by the former government will not now take place. The new Commonwealth Government made an election promise that if elected it would review this controversial plan. It did so and in June 2008 preliminary plans for a new version of the RQF, called Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) were unveiled. One aspect of the planned RQF that will probably be retained, however, is the creation of digital repositories for storing copies of all research output at the local university level, linked with a central government repository. This paper discusses the RQF with particular reference to the creation of digital repositories and the likely RQF Information Management System.

Keywords

Research Quality Framework (RQF) Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) information management systems accountability journal ranking quality metrics 

References

  1. Alexander, J. K., Scherer, R. F., and Lecoutre, M. (2007). “A global comparison of business journal ranking systems.” Journal of Education for Business 82(6): 321–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Australian Government (2006). Research Quality Framework: Assessing the Quality and Impact of Research in Australia - the Recommended RQF. Department of Education; Science and Training, Australian Government.Google Scholar
  3. Australian Government (2007a). Australian Scheme for Higher Education Repositories (ASHER) Fact Sheet. Department of Education; Science and Training, Australian Government.Google Scholar
  4. Australian Government (2007b). Cancellation of Research Quality Framework Implementation. Innovation; Industry; Science and Research, Australian Government.Google Scholar
  5. Australian Government (2007c). Research Quality Framework: Assessing the Quality and Impact of Research in Australia - RQF Technical Specifications. Department of Education; Science and Training, Australian Government.Google Scholar
  6. Australian Government (2008). Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) Initiative - Consultation Paper. Australian Research Council, Australian Government.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, Y., Gupta, A. and Hoshower, L. (2006). “Factors that motivate business faculty to conduct research: an expectancy theory analysis.” Journal of Education for Business 81(4): 179–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davey, B. and Tatnall, A. (2007). Research Knowledge Management can be Murder: University Research Management Systems. Knowledge Management for Educational Innovation. Tatnall, A., Okamoto, T. and Visscher, A. J. New York, Springer: 19–25.Google Scholar
  9. Howard, J. (2004). “Backing Australia's Ability - Building Our Future through Science and Innovation.” Retrieved January 2008, from http://backingaus.innovation.gov.au/pm_message.htm.
  10. Rodgers, J. R. and Valadkhani, A. (2006). “A multidimensional ranking of Australian economics departments.” Economic Record 82(254): 30–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rogers, P.S., Campbell, N., Louhiala-Salminen, L., Rentz, K. and Suchan, J. (2007). “The impact of perceptions of journal quality on business and management communication academics.” The Journal of Business Communication 44(4): 403–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Scopus. (2006). “Scopus Announces first-of-its-kind Customized Institutional Resources and Digital Archive Searches ”, from http://info.scopus.com/news/press/pr_060821.asp.
  13. Scopus. (2007). “Refine your Research - Scopus.” from http://info.scopus.com/news/press/pr_060821.asp.
  14. Sessions, R. and Collins, T. (1988). “More Accountability in Federally Funded Academic research: a Costly “Bill of Goods”.” Journal of the Society of Research Administrators 20(1): 195.Google Scholar
  15. Spurgeon, D. (1994). “University Censured over Research Accounting.” Nature 370(6488): 132.Google Scholar
  16. Tatnall, A. (1995). Information Technology and the Management of Victorian Schools - Providing Flexibility or Enabling Better Central Control? Information Technology in Educational Management. Barta, B. Z., Telem, M. and Gev, Y. London, Chapman & Hall: 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arthur Tatnall
    • 1
  • Bill Davey
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School of BusinessVictoria UniversityFootscrayAustralia
  2. 2.School of Business Information TechnologyRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations