Excellence has become a watchword for goal setting and assessment in science and technology policy. While the concept has been around for many years in its commonsense meaning, it is now explicitly used for science governance; however, so far little work has been done to detail, operationalize and systematize the dimensions of value present in academic evaluators’ use of the concept. This article is based on a close reading of a mid-term evaluation of several centers of excellence in Sweden, the goal of which is to achieve a detailed understanding of the evaluative components of the concept. By applying template analysis to evaluation documents, seven main components, largely referring to the organizational/institutional aspects of excellence were identified. These are analyzed and used to provide insights for evaluation scholars and practitioners into the tensions and possibilities present in the excellence concept.
Atkinson-Grosjean J. ( 2006) Public Science, Private Interests: Culture and Commerce in Canada’s Networks of Centres of Excellence. Toronto : University of Toronto Press.
2.
Balderston FE ( 1995) Managing Today’s University: Strategies for Viability, Change and Excellence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
Becher, T. ( 1994) The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education19(3): 151-61.
4.
Burt RS ( 2004) Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology110(2): 349-99.
5.
Bush V. ( 1945) Science the Endless Frontier: A Report to the President by Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, July 1945. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
6.
Doppelt G. ( 2008) Values in Science. In: Psillos S and Curd M (eds) The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science. London : Routledge, 302-13.
7.
European Commission (2008) A Strategic European Framework for International Science and Technology Cooperation . Brussels, 24.09.2008, COM(2008) 588 final.
8.
Fischer D., Atkinson-Grosjean J. and House D. ( 2001) Changes in academy/industry/state relations in Canada: the creation and development of the Networks of Centers of Excellence . Minerva39: 299-325.
9.
Fleming L., Mingo S. and Chen D. ( 2007) Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity and creative success. Administrative Science Quarterly52: 443-75.
10.
Foss SK ( 2004) Rhetorical Criticism. Long Grove, IL : Waveland Press.
11.
Fuller S. ( 2000) The Governance of Science: Ideology and the Future of the Open Society. Buckingham: Open University Press.
12.
Gillett R. ( 1991) Pitfalls in assessing research performance by grant income . Scientometrics22: 253-63.
13.
Giorgi A. ( 1997) The theory, practice, and evaluation of the phenomenological method as a qualitative research procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology28: 235-60.
14.
Goldman AI ( 1999) Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
15.
Heinze T., Shapira P., Rogers JD and Senker JM (2009) Organizational and institutional influences on creativity in scientific research. Research Policy38: 610-23.
16.
Hemlin S, Allwood CM and Martin BM (eds) (2004) Creative Knowledge Environments - The Influences on Creativity in Research and Innovation . Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
17.
Hornbostel S. ( 2001) Third party funding of German universities: an indicator of research activity? Scientometrics50: 523-37.
18.
Jackson DN and Rushton JP ( 1987) Scientific Excellence: Origins and Assessment. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
19.
King N. ( 1998) Template analysis. In: Symon G and Cassell C (eds) Qualitative Methods and Analysis in Organizational Research. London: SAGE.
20.
Kuhn T. ( 1977) The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
21.
Lacey H. ( 1999) Is Science Value Free? Values and Scientific Understanding . London: Routledge.
22.
Lamont M. ( 2009) How Professors Think. Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
Laudel G. ( 2006) The ‘quality myth’: promoting and hindering conditions for acquiring research funds. Higher Education52: 375-403.
24.
Longino H. ( 1990) Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton : Princeton University Press.
25.
Longino H. ( 2002) The Fate of Knowledge. New Jersey : Princeton University Press.
26.
Mansilla VB and Gardner H. ( 2006) Assessing expert interdisciplinary work at the frontier: an empirical exploration. Research Evaluation15(1): 17-29.
27.
Merton RK ( 1973) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Pelz DC and Andrews FM ( 1966) Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climates for Research and Development. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
29.
Pounder JS ( 2000) Evaluating the relevance of quality to institutional performance assessment in higher education. Evaluation6(1): 66-78.
30.
Schmoch U. and Schubert T.(2009) Sustainability of incentives for excellent research - the German case . Scientometrics81(1): 195-218.
31.
Tjissen RJW ( 2003) Scoreboard of research excellence. Research Evaluation12(2): 91-103.
Whitley R. ( 2007) Changing governance of the public sciences. In: Whitley Rand Gläser J (eds) The Changing Governance of the Sciences. Dordrecht: Springer, 3-27.
