Article Preview
Top1. Introduction
The performance of human resource involved in scientific research is rarely at the forefront of assessing the results of field tests. Performance management has two different evaluation directions, the performance of human resource and organizational performance. Studied together, the two are conditioned on each other, the difference is only through the measurement indicators. It is obvious that if HR research performance will be high, then the organization will be one of the top in the field. Maybe compared to business environment in the scientific research, the implications of motivation and financial support and specific infrastructure for researchers to obtain relevant results lead to individual and organizational recognition. From this point of view, performance management can be defined as “Process by which the fairness of employee performance evaluation procedures affects the interests of employees (subordinates), senior management (superiors), and the organization. Employee performance evaluation in general and the fairness of the evaluation procedures in particular are important management accounting issues because they are key aspects of management control systems” (Lau, Oger, 2012).
Several studies investigate methods for evaluating the performance in scientific research. “Literature on performance measurement of R&D has suggested multi-dimensional measures as no single measure can capture the multi-objectives and are unable to give complete and relevant information to the management or the stakeholders about the performance of the R&D” (Werner, Souder, 1997; Brown, Gobeli, 1992; Kim, Oh, 2002; Roy et al., 2003; Karlsson et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2005; Jyoti, Banwet, 2008). “Some literatures identified the different key performance indicators, including tangible and intangible aspect” (Abramo, Cicero, D’Angelo, 2013; Chin, Pun, Lau, & Lau, 2001; Himes, 2007; Jones & Kaluarachchi, 2008; Mukherjee, Nath, & Pal, 2002; Robson & Prabhu, 2001; Wainwright, Green, Mitchell, & Yarrow, 2005; Welch & Mann, 2001):
The research-related performance of universities, as well as that of individual researchers, is increasingly evaluated through the use of objective measures, or metrics, which seek to support or in some cases even replace more traditional methods of peer review (Nightingale, Marshall 2013).
In the area of research performance, such levels of heterogeneity are confirmed by relatively high values of the Gini concentration index, although referred to the gross performance indicator of publications per researcher (Halffman & Leydesdorff, 2010).
In competitive systems, in fact, there is a concentration of top researchers in elite universities and low performers in the lower prestige institutions (Abramo, Cicero, D’Angelo, 2013).