International Comparative Study on the Management, Productivity, and Effectiveness of Research Teams and Institutions (ICSOPRU), 1971-1989

Aimed to improve the management of research teams and institutions and increase awareness of their responsibility concerning proper application of research results. Concrete objectives were twofold: (1) on the international level, to make widely available comparable facts and experiences concerning the management of research teams and to promote multilateral as well as bilateral cooperation in this field, and (2) on the national level to provide all those concerned (science policy-makers, research managers, scientists, engineers) with substantive information on the state of their national research potential and to encourage them, on the basis of this information compared eventually with similar information from other countries, to take self-corrective actions as needed to improve the level of effectiveness and productivity of the research teams and institutions. 17 countries from Africa, the Arab States, Asia, Europe and Latin America took part. There were 4 stages or rounds of data collection: 6 countries (Austria, Belgium, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Sweden) in Round 1 (February-September 1974), 6 countries (Argentina, Egypt, India, Republic of Korea [South], Poland, Ukrainian S.S.R.) in Round 2 (June 1978-September 1981), 5 countries (Brazil, India, Nigeria, Spain, Ukrainian S.S.R.) in Round 3 (October 1981-November 1985), and 4 countries (China, Ghana, Hungary, Mexico) in Round 4 (May 1985- June 1987). Each round of questionnaires had different items (except for Rounds 2 and 3 which were the same). Round 1 items included general administrative information relevant to the research units answered by the administrator of the unit, scientific information on the research unit and information relevant to the unit's head answered by the head of the unit, individual information answered by scientists and engineers of the unit, individual information answered by technicians of the unit, and external evaluation of the research units from various scientific and administrative perspectives answered by external evaluators. Rounds 2 and 3 included general information about the research unit answered by the head of the unit, information on the respondent and his or her evaluation of the research unit's management, items on productivity and effectiveness answered by head of the unit along with scientists, engineers, and technicians of the unit, EV-rating of the research unit's effectiveness on a series of dimensions dealing with scientific or social criteria and administrative criteria answered by external evaluators. The 4th round of questionnaires included information on the institutional environment of the research unit answered by the head of the institution, general information on the research unit answered by the head of the unit, information on the respondent and his or her evaluation of the research unit's management, items on productivity and effectiveness answered by the head of the unit, scientists, engineers, and technicians.