Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Oct;90(10):1302-8.
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000759.

Evaluating Academic Scientists Collaborating in Team-Based Research: A Proposed Framework

Affiliations

Evaluating Academic Scientists Collaborating in Team-Based Research: A Proposed Framework

Madhu Mazumdar et al. Acad Med. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

Criteria for evaluating faculty are traditionally based on a triad of scholarship, teaching, and service. Research scholarship is often measured by first or senior authorship on peer-reviewed scientific publications and being principal investigator on extramural grants. Yet scientific innovation increasingly requires collective rather than individual creativity, which traditional measures of achievement were not designed to capture and, thus, devalue. The authors propose a simple, flexible framework for evaluating team scientists that includes both quantitative and qualitative assessments. An approach for documenting contributions of team scientists in team-based scholarship, nontraditional education, and specialized service activities is also outlined. Although biostatisticians are used for illustration, the approach is generalizable to team scientists in other disciplines.The authors offer three key recommendations to members of institutional promotion committees, department chairs, and others evaluating team scientists. First, contributions to team-based scholarship and specialized contributions to education and service need to be assessed and given appropriate and substantial weight. Second, evaluations must be founded on well-articulated criteria for assessing the stature and accomplishments of team scientists. Finally, mechanisms for collecting evaluative data must be developed and implemented at the institutional level. Without these three essentials, contributions of team scientists will continue to be undervalued in the academic environment.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Bennett LM, Gadlin H, Levine-Finley S. Collaboration and Team Science: A Field Guide. Bethesda, MD: NIH; 2010. (NIH Publication No. 10-7660). https://ccrod.cancer.gov/confluence/download/attachments/47284665/TeamSc.... Accessed March 20, 2015.
    1. King C. Multiauthored papers: Onward and Upward. ScienceWatch Newsletter. 2012 Jul; http://archive.sciencewatch.com/newsletter/2012/201207/multiauthor_papers/. Accessed March 20, 2015.
    1. Benedyk M, Berglund L, Facciotti M, Mobley W, Zucker D. Strategies for innovation and interdisciplinary translational research: research and career benefits and barriers. J Investig Med. 2009;57:477–81. - PubMed
    1. Rikakis T. Innovative faculty evaluation criteria for incentivizing high-impact interdisciplinary collaboration; 39th ASEE.IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Session M4E-1-6; San Antonio, TX. 2009.
    1. Bunton S. Research director, Organization and Management Studies, Association of American Medical Colleges. Personal communication with Madhu Mazumdar. 2014 May 22;

Publication types

Grants and funding