International journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN:2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 6, Issue 4 (April 2019), Pages: 130-142

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Faculty members’ productivity and research funding: Intrinsic and/or extrinsic motivations

 Author(s): Ramzi Ben Slama 1, 2, *, Jamel Choukir 1, 3

 Affiliation(s):

 1Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
 2University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia
 3University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1169-818X

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2019.04.015

 Abstract:

This paper investigates the publication activity and the value of research funding in Saudi institutions of higher education. Our main question was what is the relationship between the efficiency of chair research funding and the productivity of faculty members? This interdisciplinary paper consists of applying econometric modeling to determine the profile of a faculty member involved in research and the Return on investment (ROI) methodology to assess the value of the funding in the case of SABIC chair. A survey using a questionnaire on perceptions of academic research productivity and documentary analysis of the profile of funding recipients showed that research funding has a positive impact on faculty productivity (2.66 published papers more) when the count considered is the number of published papers. However, there is no significant relationship between grants and publications in peer-reviewed journals with an impact factor. Furthermore, the results revealed that the estimated ROI was 37.2% more. 

 © 2019 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Intrinsic motivation, Extrinsic motivation, Faculty members' productivity, Count data models, Return on investment

 Article History: Received 1 November 2018, Received in revised form 15 February 2019, Accepted 18 February 2019

 Acknowledgement:

This work was supported by SABIC Chair under Grant No. 11-47.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest:  The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

 Citation:

  Slama RB and Choukir J (2019). Faculty members’ productivity and research funding: Intrinsic and/or extrinsic motivations. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 6(4): 130-142

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2 

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 

----------------------------------------------

 References (33) 

  1. Abu-Orabi ST (2012a). Scientific research and higher education in the Arab world: Reality and outlook. Scientific Research Society, Secretary General of the Association of Arab Universities, Amman, Jordan. 
  2. Abu-Orabi ST (2012b). Scientific research and higher education in the Islamic world. In the Conference on the Future of Ranking? Cooperation or/and Competition, University of Bucharest, Romania. 
  3. Alshayea A (2013). Scientific research in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Potential for excellence and indicators of underdevelopment. Higher Education Studies, 3(5): 47-51. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v3n5p47   [Google Scholar]
  4. Aubyn MS, Garcia F, and Pais J (2009). Study on the efficiency and effectiveness of public spending on tertiary education. No. 390, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission, ISEG, Lisboan, Portugal.   [Google Scholar] PMCid:PMC2778747
  5. Bawden J, Manouchehri N, Villa-Roel C, Grafstein E, and Rowe BH (2010). Important returns on investment: An evaluation of a national research grants competition in emergency medicine. Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine, 12(1): 33-38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1481803500011994   [Google Scholar] PMid:20078916
  6. Bland CJ, Center BA, Finstad DA, Risbey KR, and Staples JG (2005). A theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research productivity. Academic Medicine, 80(3): 225-237. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200503000-00006   [Google Scholar] PMid:15734804
  7. Bland CJ, Seaquist E, Pacala JT, Center B, and Finstad D (2002). One school's strategy to assess and improve the vitality of its faculty. Academic Medicine, 77(5): 368-376. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200205000-00004   [Google Scholar] PMid:12010690
  8. Buxton M and Hanney S (1996). How can payback from health services research be assessed?. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 1(1): 35-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/135581969600100107    [Google Scholar]PMid:10180843
  9. Carayol N and Matt M (2004). Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university. Research Policy, 33(8): 1081-1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.03.004   [Google Scholar]
  10. Choukir J (2014). Preparatory program return on investment: Case of college of economics and administrative sciences. Workings Papers, Al-Imam University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.   
  11. DFID (2005). Rates of return on research: A literature review and critique. Department for International Development, London, UK.   
  12. Dinesh KS and Moinuddin A (2012). Return on investment and effort expenditure in the software development environment. International Journal of Applied Information Systems, 4(7): 35-41. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijais12-450813   [Google Scholar]
  13. Dundar H and Lewis DR (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 39(6): 607-631. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018705823763   [Google Scholar]
  14. Fan S and Hazell P (2000). Should developing countries invest more in less-favoured areas? An empirical analysis of rural India. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(17): 1455-1464.   [Google Scholar]
  15. Fan S, Nyange D, and Rao N (2005). Public investment and poverty reduction in Tanzania. DSGD Discussion Papers No. 18, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., USA.   [Google Scholar]
  16. Gardner BL (1999). Returns to policy-related social science research in agriculture. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., USA.   [Google Scholar]
  17. Gomez-Mejia LR and Balkin DB (1992). Determinants of faculty pay: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5): 921-955.   [Google Scholar]
  18. Hausman JA (1993). Contingent valuation: A Critical Assessment. North-Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0573-8555(1993)220   [Google Scholar]
  19. Hesli VL and Lee JM (2011). Faculty research productivity: Why do some of our colleagues publish more than others?. PS: Political Science and Politics, 44(2): 393-408. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096511000242   [Google Scholar]
  20. Hitt MA and Greer CR (2012). The value of research and its evaluation in business schools: Killing the goose that laid the golden egg?. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(2): 236-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492611428721   [Google Scholar]
  21. Jaffe AB (1989). Real effects of academic research. The American Economic Review, 79(5): 957-970.   [Google Scholar]
  22. Jonker L and Hicks M (2014). Teaching loads and research outputs of Ontario university faculty members: Implications for productivity and differentiation. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario, Toronto, Canada.   [Google Scholar]
  23. Laffont JJ and Martimort D (2009). The theory of incentives: The principal-agent model. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv7h0rwr   [Google Scholar]
  24. Locke EA and Dunnette MD (1976). Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. In: Locke EA (Ed.), The nature and causes of job satisfaction: 1297-1349. Rand McNally, Chicago, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  25. Lotka AJ (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16(12): 317-323.   [Google Scholar]
  26. Mansfield E (1991). Academic research and industrial innovation. Research Policy, 20(1): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90080-A   [Google Scholar]
  27. OCUA (1994). The structure of academic work. Task Force on Resource Allocation, Ontario Council on University Affairs, Toronto, Canada.   
  28. Phillips JJ and Phillips PP (2010). Proving the value of HR: ROI cases study. 2nd Edition, ROI Institute, Birmingham, UK.   
  29. Phillips JJ and Phillips PP (2012). Measuring ROI in learning and development: Case studies from global organizations. American Society for Training and Development, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  30. SABIC (2015). Chair reports 2010-2014. Saudi Arabian Basic Industries Corporation Petrochemical Manufacturing Company, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.   
  31. Schimmelpfennig DE and Norton GW (2003). What is the value of agricultural economics research?. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85(1): 81-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8276.00104   [Google Scholar]
  32. Tenopir C (2010). Measuring the value of the academic library: Return on investment and other value measures. The Serials Librarian, 58(1-4): 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/03615261003623005   [Google Scholar]
  33. Teodorescu D (2000). Correlates of faculty publication productivity: A cross-national analysis. Higher Education, 39(2): 201-222. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003901018634   [Google Scholar]