Background This study examines the practical implementation of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment within the National Research Council of Italy by analysing the 2023 competitive procedures for the career progression of researchers and technologists. As the institution formally adopted the reform to shift towards a more responsible and qualitative evaluation framework, this research investigates the extent to which these high-level commitments were applied within the calls by the individual evaluation committees. Methods A systematic qualitative and quantitative analysis was conducted on 4,090 evaluation criteria established by 90 independent evaluation committees. The criteria were examined to assess their alignment with the four core commitments of the Agreement and the inclusion of Open Science principles. Results Results indicate a significant gap between institutional policy and actual practice: most committees do not fully recognise the diversity of research contributions, often undervaluing or excluding non-traditional outputs, such as teaching and evaluation activities, or public and policy engagement. Quantitative and mechanical metrics continue to be widely used in researcher evaluations, with journal-based indicators often used to assess research quality. Regarding Open Science practices, they appeared only sporadically in the assessed criteria. Conclusions These findings suggest that traditional evaluation practices persist at the committee level, despite formal institutional reform. The study highlights that high-level policy adoption alone is insufficient without robust guidance to operationalise reform principles during the assessment process. This research provides insights into the challenges of transitioning from policy to practice in research assessment within a large, multidisciplinary Research Performing Organisation.

Mind the Gap: From Policy to Practice at CNR An Analysis of Career Advancement Criteria in Light of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment

Di Donato, Francesca
;
Mannocci, Andrea;Pecoraro, Fabrizio;Provost, Lottie
2026

Abstract

Background This study examines the practical implementation of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment within the National Research Council of Italy by analysing the 2023 competitive procedures for the career progression of researchers and technologists. As the institution formally adopted the reform to shift towards a more responsible and qualitative evaluation framework, this research investigates the extent to which these high-level commitments were applied within the calls by the individual evaluation committees. Methods A systematic qualitative and quantitative analysis was conducted on 4,090 evaluation criteria established by 90 independent evaluation committees. The criteria were examined to assess their alignment with the four core commitments of the Agreement and the inclusion of Open Science principles. Results Results indicate a significant gap between institutional policy and actual practice: most committees do not fully recognise the diversity of research contributions, often undervaluing or excluding non-traditional outputs, such as teaching and evaluation activities, or public and policy engagement. Quantitative and mechanical metrics continue to be widely used in researcher evaluations, with journal-based indicators often used to assess research quality. Regarding Open Science practices, they appeared only sporadically in the assessed criteria. Conclusions These findings suggest that traditional evaluation practices persist at the committee level, despite formal institutional reform. The study highlights that high-level policy adoption alone is insufficient without robust guidance to operationalise reform principles during the assessment process. This research provides insights into the challenges of transitioning from policy to practice in research assessment within a large, multidisciplinary Research Performing Organisation.
Campo DC Valore Lingua
dc.authority.ancejournal OPEN RESEARCH EUROPE en
dc.authority.orgunit Istituto di linguistica computazionale "Antonio Zampolli" - ILC en
dc.authority.people Di Donato, Francesca en
dc.authority.people Mannocci, Andrea en
dc.authority.people Pecoraro, Fabrizio en
dc.authority.people Provost, Lottie en
dc.authority.project corda_____he::6f17d6d6d3e7c3ed44ad6f92b76e870d en
dc.collection.id.s b3f88f24-048a-4e43-8ab1-6697b90e068e *
dc.collection.name 01.01 Articolo in rivista *
dc.contributor.appartenenza Istituto di Ricerche sulla Popolazione e le Politiche Sociali - IRPPS *
dc.contributor.appartenenza Istituto di Scienza e Tecnologie dell'Informazione "Alessandro Faedo" - ISTI *
dc.contributor.appartenenza Istituto di linguistica computazionale "Antonio Zampolli" - ILC *
dc.contributor.appartenenza.mi 918 *
dc.contributor.appartenenza.mi 961 *
dc.contributor.appartenenza.mi 973 *
dc.contributor.area Non assegn *
dc.contributor.area Non assegn *
dc.contributor.area Non assegn *
dc.contributor.area Non assegn *
dc.date.accessioned 2026/07/27 11:17:19 -
dc.date.available 2026/07/27 11:17:19 -
dc.date.firstsubmission 2026/07/27 11:02:35 *
dc.date.issued 2026 -
dc.date.submission 2026/07/27 11:02:35 *
dc.description.abstracteng Background This study examines the practical implementation of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment within the National Research Council of Italy by analysing the 2023 competitive procedures for the career progression of researchers and technologists. As the institution formally adopted the reform to shift towards a more responsible and qualitative evaluation framework, this research investigates the extent to which these high-level commitments were applied within the calls by the individual evaluation committees. Methods A systematic qualitative and quantitative analysis was conducted on 4,090 evaluation criteria established by 90 independent evaluation committees. The criteria were examined to assess their alignment with the four core commitments of the Agreement and the inclusion of Open Science principles. Results Results indicate a significant gap between institutional policy and actual practice: most committees do not fully recognise the diversity of research contributions, often undervaluing or excluding non-traditional outputs, such as teaching and evaluation activities, or public and policy engagement. Quantitative and mechanical metrics continue to be widely used in researcher evaluations, with journal-based indicators often used to assess research quality. Regarding Open Science practices, they appeared only sporadically in the assessed criteria. Conclusions These findings suggest that traditional evaluation practices persist at the committee level, despite formal institutional reform. The study highlights that high-level policy adoption alone is insufficient without robust guidance to operationalise reform principles during the assessment process. This research provides insights into the challenges of transitioning from policy to practice in research assessment within a large, multidisciplinary Research Performing Organisation. -
dc.description.allpeople Di Donato, Francesca; Mannocci, Andrea; Pecoraro, Fabrizio; Provost, Lottie -
dc.description.allpeopleoriginal Di Donato, Francesca; Mannocci, Andrea; Pecoraro, Fabrizio; Provost, Lottie en
dc.description.fulltext open en
dc.description.numberofauthors 4 -
dc.identifier.doi 10.12688/openreseurope.23373.2 en
dc.identifier.source crossref *
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14243/592588 -
dc.language.iso eng en
dc.relation.projectAcronym GraspOS en
dc.relation.projectAwardNumber 101095129 en
dc.relation.projectAwardTitle GraspOS: next Generation Research Assessment to Promote Open Science en
dc.relation.projectFunderName European Commission en
dc.relation.projectFundingStream Horizon Europe Framework Programme - HORIZON Research and Innovation Actions en
dc.relation.volume 6 en
dc.subject.keywordseng Coara, Open science, CNR -
dc.subject.singlekeyword Coara *
dc.subject.singlekeyword Open science *
dc.subject.singlekeyword CNR *
dc.title Mind the Gap: From Policy to Practice at CNR An Analysis of Career Advancement Criteria in Light of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment en
dc.type.driver info:eu-repo/semantics/article -
dc.type.full 01 Contributo su Rivista::01.01 Articolo in rivista it
dc.type.miur 262 -
iris.mediafilter.data 2026/07/28 03:58:18 *
iris.orcid.lastModifiedDate 2026/07/27 11:17:19 *
iris.orcid.lastModifiedMillisecond 1785143839332 *
iris.sitodocente.maxattempts 1 -
iris.unpaywall.metadataCallLastModified 29/07/2026 03:24:11 -
iris.unpaywall.metadataCallLastModifiedMillisecond 1785288251296 -
iris.unpaywall.metadataErrorDescription 0 -
iris.unpaywall.metadataErrorType ERROR_NO_MATCH -
iris.unpaywall.metadataStatus ERROR -
Appare nelle tipologie: 01.01 Articolo in rivista
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
0048b9fd-6240-48a8-a01f-c19dd6dee12e_oreu_23373.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 2.63 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.63 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14243/592588
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact