|
Research Evaluation in a Country In Transition: Experiences and Lessons From Vietnam
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Michael Braun, Vietnam Science & Technology Evaluation Center, michael@most.gov.vn
|
| Doan Trinh Ta, Vietnam Science & Technology Evaluation Center, tdtrinh@most.gov.vn
|
| Thi Thu Oanh Nguyen, Vietnam Science & Technology Evaluation Center, ntoanh@most.gov.vn
|
| Abstract:
To transform Vietnam into an innovation-based industrial country, its National Innovation System (NIS) must be rebuilt. Research investment must be boosted, the innovation performance of research institutes and enterprises must be enhanced drastically and historically grown, centrally planned research policies and structures must be radically re-designed.
To support this process, Vietnam introduces a research evaluation system for the first time. But evaluation results are needed immediately - there is no 'grace period' for learning to develop evaluation strategies, integrating them in the overall policy framework, building evaluation capacities and gaining stakeholder commitment to the concept of evaluation. Sustainable evaluation impact on NIS improvement depends on active stakeholder participation and overcoming resistance to change.
Experiences with setting up a first generation evaluation system and pathways for its further development are discussed. Beyond methodological issues, the challenges of developing evaluation skills and structures and of building an 'evaluation culture' are addressed.
|
|
Self-evaluation Model and Methodology of Chinese Academy of Sciences in Knowledge Innovation Program
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Xiaoxuan Li, Chinese Academy of Sciences, xiaoxuan@casipm.ac.cn
|
| Bing Shi, Chinese Academy of Sciences, bshi@cashq.ac.cn
|
| Tao Dai, Chinese Academy of Sciences, daitao@casipm.ac.cn
|
| Jianzhong Zhou, Chinese Academy of Sciences, zzhou@casipm.ac.cn
|
| Xiaoyang Xu, Chinese Academy of Sciences, xuxiaoyang@casipm.ac
|
| Abstract:
To satisfy the requirements of State Council, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) launched the self-evaluation of Knowledge Innovation Program (KIP, 1998-2010) in 2010. An 'objectives-processes-outcomes' logic evaluation model was developed, which was mainly focused on the fulfillment of the objectives set in KIP, the effectiveness of measures and the outcomes and impacts of KIP. The evaluation involved: (1) an evaluation of research institutes in CAS, composed of self-evaluation and the experts review; (2) an evaluation and review of the special 'Innovation Bases' by an outside advisory and review experts panel; (3) a self-evaluation and summing-up of key aspects of managerial work; (4) a seminar to explore how the reform objectives of KIP could be further promoted. The challenges faced in this self-evaluation practice were also discussed. Finally, we concluded that the logic model and method were feasible to evaluate the performance of CAS in KIP according to the evaluation practice.
|
| |