Accessibility Tools
For Iris Uribesalgo, learning from the process, leaders taking ownership and building institutional capacity are key to shaping meaningful and sustainable change in assessment practices.
Over the past decade, research and academic career assessment has become a central topic of reflection across research-performing organisations.
Assessment choices shape both the present and the future of these institutions. Deciding how people and research are assessed, and how those choices align with institutional values and long-term goals, plays a fundamental role in determining what a research-performing organisation is and what it becomes.
The process within an organisation to advance in its assessment practices, and not only the outcomes of the reform, brings some of the most important lessons learned to achieve that changes are meaningful and sustainable.
From my experience working with research organisations and engaging in discussions on assessment reform, including through initiatives such as the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA), the success stories often display similarities. One is that the people carrying out the reform know that the first solution will not be the one that sticks, but that it will need to be refined.
Reform must be understood as iterative and adaptive. Assessment systems must be dynamic. They need to evolve in response to feedback, institutional learning and changing contexts, while remaining anchored in core values. This requires space to test new approaches, listen to each other, learn from failure and adjust course when needed. Reform is not a straight path, but a learning process in its own right.
This is especially visible in recruitment, particularly the recruitment of principal investigators. Hiring decisions shape research and organisational culture for years to come.
Who becomes a leader? Which behaviours are reproduced? What types of research cultures persist? The assessment criteria used during recruitment influence candidates – whether they are recruited or not, newcomers and the whole community in a research organisation. Reflecting on both the process and the outcomes of recruitment, and refining them based on experience, is therefore crucial.
It is, thus, not by chance that this topic has been central at EU-LIFE during the past decade. During this period we have conducted internal discussions and reflections among our membership of leading research institutes across Europe, who have shared concrete practices of recruitment processes that support unbiased, transparent and merit-based assessment – such as examples from the University of Copenhagen Biotech Research & Innovation Centre (BRIC) in the context of cultivating the next generation of research leaders. These examples play an important role in collective learning.
Another element, and one that is key for sustainable change, is that each research institution’s leadership don’t simply endorse the changes to assessment practices that are proposed, but that they get involved in decisions about assessment reform from the beginning, reflect on their implications and take responsibility for their implementation.
This level of leadership involvement allows assessment to be aligned with institutional strategy, ensures that adequate resources are allocated and sends a clear signal that reform is neither optional nor temporary. When leaders take ownership of the reform, institutions are better able to protect it from short-term backlash, long-term fatigue, shifting funding priorities, or reliance on individual goodwill.
At the same time, strong leadership engagement reinforces and supports the work of researchers, managers and administrators who are already driving meaningful change on the ground. In this way, assessment reform becomes an institutional commitment rather than a collection of fragmented or individual-led initiatives.
This type of leadership ownership also helps ensure that institutional principles and values are present in broader reflections and decision-making processes. While not focused on assessment itself, the EU-LIFE Charter of Independent Life Science Research Institutes is the outcome of a long-term reflection by EU-LIFE institute directors on shared values. These include excellence, responsibility, openness, collaboration, diversity and inclusivity, all of which underpin institutional choices, including those related to assessment and careers.
The reform of research and academic career assessment in research organisations has plenty of momentum. This is shown by the growing number of resources, tools and initiatives worldwide. Initiatives such as CoARA and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), also with growing numbers of members and signatories, have provided a valuable shared framework and common principles, helping to align efforts.
Yet this expanding landscape also brings new challenges, such as the lack of capacity to navigate existing resources, prioritise actions and translate commitments into coherent institutional practice. Even for committed institutions, the sheer volume of available guidance can feel overwhelming.
In this context, efforts that help institutions and individuals navigate existing tools and resources are particularly valuable. As such, the CoARA Working Group on Reforming Academic Career Assessment (ACA), of which EU-LIFE is a member, is developing an interactive, conceptual framework designed to support institutions in reforming academic career assessment, no matter the stage in which they are in. Once finalised, the framework will be open and accessible, allowing to explore tools and resources that align with institutional goals, context and institutional roles.
To conclude, reforming research and academic career assessment is not about identifying a perfect, one-size-fits-all model or checklist, nor a one-off compliance exercise. It is an opportunity to strengthen research organisations, the people who sustain them, and science itself.
While the destination matters, the journey – with its reflection, iteration, collective learning, commitment and ownership – will determine whether assessment reform truly takes root.
