IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v54y2025i1s0048733324001707.html

Leading researchers in the leadership of leading research universities: Meta-research analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ioannidis, John P.A.

Abstract

It is unknown to what extent leading researchers are currently involved in the leadership of leading research universities as presidents or as executive board members. The academic administrative leader (president or equivalent role) of each of the 146 Carnegie tier 1 USA universities and of any of the top-100 universities per Times Higher Education (THE) 2024 ranking and the members of the executive governing bodies (Board of Trustees, Council, Corporation or similar) for the each of the top-20 universities per THE 2024 ranking were examined for high citation impact in their scientific subfield. Highly-cited was defined as the top-2 % of a composite citation indicator (that considers citations, h-index, co-authorship adjusted hm-index and citations to papers as single, first, last authors) in their main scientific subfield based on career-long impact until end-2022 among all scholars focusing in the same subfield and having published ≥5 full papers. Very highly-cited was similarly defined as the top-0.2 %. Science was divided into 174 fields per Science-Metrix classification. 38/146 (26 %) tier 1 USA university leaders as of end-2023 were highly-cited and 5/146 (3 %) were very highly-cited. The respective figures for the top-100 THE 2024 universities globally were 43/100 and 12/100. For the 13 US universities among the top-20 of THE 2024, the probability of their leader being highly-cited was lower (6/13, 46 %) than the probability of a randomly chosen active full tenured professor from their faculty being highly-cited (52–77 %). Across 444 board members of 14 top-10 THE 2024 universities with data, only 65 (15 %) were academics, and 19 (4 %) were highly-cited; academics were rare in USA university boards. Board members had predominantly careers in for-profit companies. In conclusion, leading research universities have a dearth of leaders who are high-impact researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ioannidis, John P.A., 2025. "Leading researchers in the leadership of leading research universities: Meta-research analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:1:s0048733324001707
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2024.105121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733324001707
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105121?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:plo:pbio00:1002501 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. John P A Ioannidis & Kevin W Boyack & Jeroen Baas, 2020. "Updated science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(10), pages 1-3, October.
    3. Goodall, Amanda H., 2009. "Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1079-1092, September.
    4. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    5. Amanda H. Goodall & John M. McDowell & Larry D. Singell, 2017. "Do Economics Departments Improve after They Appoint a Top Scholar as Chairperson?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(4), pages 546-564, November.
    6. repec:plo:pbio00:3000384 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Brian Pusser & Sheila Slaughter & Scott L. Thomas, 2006. "Playing the Board Game: An Empirical Analysis of University Trustee and Corporate Board Interlocks," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(5), pages 747-775, September.
    8. Michele Catanzaro, 2023. "Saudi universities entice top scientists to switch affiliations — sometimes with cash," Nature, Nature, vol. 617(7961), pages 446-447, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marta Kuc-Czarnecka & Andrea Saltelli, 2025. "Ranking the rankers. An analysis of science-wide author databases of standardised citation indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(3), pages 1497-1517, March.
    2. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2025. "Hyperprolific authorship: Unveiling the extent of extreme publishing in the ‘publish or perish’ era," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2).
    3. John P. A. Ioannidis & Thomas A. Collins & Jeroen Baas, 2024. "Evolving patterns of extreme publishing behavior across science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5783-5796, September.
    4. Bäker, Agnes & Goodall, Amanda H., 2020. "Feline followers and “umbrella carriers”: Department Chairs’ influence on faculty job satisfaction and quit intentions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    5. Uschi Backes-Gellner & Agnes Bäker & Kerstin Pull, 2018. "The Opportunity Costs of Becoming a Dean: Does Leadership in Academia Crowd Out Research?," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 70(2), pages 189-208, May.
    6. Stefanie Ringelhan & Jutta Wollersheim & Isabell M Welpe, 2015. "I Like, I Cite? Do Facebook Likes Predict the Impact of Scientific Work?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, August.
    7. Osterloh, Margit & Frey, Bruno S., 2020. "How to avoid borrowed plumes in academia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    8. Nicola Scafetta, 2025. "Measuring scholarly performance using comprehensive standardized research-teaching (RT) score," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 2595-2616, May.
    9. Sasvári, Péter & Lendvai, Gergely Ferenc, 2025. "The overrepresentation of the United States in the field of legal studies in the science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
    10. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    11. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    12. Michaela Strinzel & Josh Brown & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner & Sarah Rijcke & Michael Hill, 2021. "Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-4, December.
    13. repec:plo:pone00:0235265 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Dima Jamali & Georges Samara & Lokman I. Meho, 2024. "Determinants of research productivity and efficiency among the Arab world’s accredited business schools," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2511-2543, December.
    15. Hyeonchae Yang & Woo-Sung Jung, 2015. "A strategic management approach for Korean public research institutes based on bibliometric investigation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1437-1464, July.
    16. Wil M. P. Aalst & Oliver Hinz & Christof Weinhardt, 2023. "Ranking the Ranker: How to Evaluate Institutions, Researchers, Journals, and Conferences?," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 65(6), pages 615-621, December.
    17. Alexander Kalgin & Olga Kalgina & Anna Lebedeva, 2019. "Publication Metrics as a Tool for Measuring Research Productivity and Their Relation to Motivation," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    18. Gregorio González-Alcaide, 2021. "Bibliometric studies outside the information science and library science field: uncontainable or uncontrollable?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6837-6870, August.
    19. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    20. Esther Hormiga & Petra Saá-Pérez & Nieves L. Díaz-Díaz & José Luis Ballesteros-Rodríguez & Inmaculada Aguiar-Diaz, 2017. "The influence of entrepreneurial orientation on the performance of academic research groups: the mediating role of knowledge sharing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 10-32, February.
    21. Joost Kosten, 2016. "A classification of the use of research indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 457-464, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:1:s0048733324001707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.