Skip to main content
Favorite
Add To List
Jonathan Adams

Jonathan Adams

Director of the Institute for Scientific Information, Clarivate Analytics
Jonathan Adams is Director of the Institute for Scientific Information, a part of Clarivate Analytics. He is also a Visiting Professor at King’s College London, Policy Institute, and was awarded an Honorary D.Sc. in 2017 by the University of Exeter, for his work in higher education and research policy. Professor Adams was the lead founder of Evidence Ltd, Director of Research Evaluation for Thomson Reuters, and Chief Scientist at Digital Science & Research Ltd. He has carried out research evaluation for agencies and institutions in the UK, elsewhere in Europe, Brazil, Australia, China and India. Jonathan led the New Zealand government's 2008 review of research evaluation and was a member of the Australian Research Council (ARC) indicators development groups for Excellence in Research for Australia (2009) and impact and engagement (2016). In 2004 he chaired the European Commission Monitoring Committee for the Evaluation of Framework Programme 6 (FP6); and, in 2006, he chaired the Monitoring Group of the European Research Fund for Coal & Steel. He has worked at King's College London (1979-1980), University of Newcastle upon Tyne (1980-1983), University of Leeds (1983-1989) and Imperial College London (1989-1992), was a member of the science policy staff of the UK Advisory Board for the Research Councils (1989-1992) and Leeds University's Director of Research Strategy (1993-1997).

Matching Videos

1 Matching Videos
The primary selling point of metrics for the academic researcher was the promise that the proof provided by such metrics of the value of one’s work would be the increased and long-term funding needed to do such work. Prestige, tenure, influence, even celebrity -- these have been stepping stones to securing significant (and much-needed) grants to educational institutions of all sizes and types. But have these incentives been subverted over time or in specific ways? Is the drive to publish-or-perish the best mechanism for encouraging substantive study? The integrity of the publishing process and perhaps the integrity of the funding model for higher education itself is at stake. This session will look at some of the troubling questions surrounding the incentives offered to the working scholar, researcher, and scientist. Presenters in this virtual conference will consider the following questions: · How might institutions and research facilities best weld available indicators of use or influence into a meaningful metric? · If individual scholarship is best gauged by the value assigned to it by the larger community, then what collection of metrics should be gathered for purposes of determining appropriate rewards in the context of academia? · How might institutions better address this challenge and reward faculty appropriately?

We are NISO, the National Information Standards Organization. We’re the place where information professionals turn for industry standards that enable them to work together. Let us help keep you informed about what’s happening at NISO and in the wider information community by signing up for emails in your area(s) of interest.