Benchmarking scholarly performance by faculty in forestry and forest products

Abstract

Measures of scholarly performance have proliferated, without corresponding efforts to standardize comparisons among faculty. An exception was a recent use of regression to model sources of variation in scholarly performance by fisheries and wildlife faculty. We applied this model-based method to data for 404 forestry and forest products faculty from 33 doctoral-degree-granting institutional members of the National Association of University Forest Resources Programs. Regression models were developed for h-index, the number of publications with at least h citations, and m quotient, the annual rate of change in h-index since conferral of the Ph.D. Years since Ph.D. and percent of appointment allocated to research were important predictors for h-index and m quotient. We also noted positive subdisciplinary effects for research foci in conservation, ecology, disease, and quantitative methods, and negative effects for management and social science. Standardized residuals enabled relative performance to be compared among faculty who differ in academic age, research appointment, and subdisciplinary focus. Model-based benchmarking provides much-needed context for interpretation of quantitative performance metrics and can supplement comprehensive peer evaluation. An interactive web application is provided to facilitate such benchmarking.