Journal of Information and Knowledge (Formerly SRELS Journal of Information Management)

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Impact of Grant-in-Aid Projects at CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, India: A Bibliometric Study


Affiliations
1 CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, IMD Centre, PO. Burmamines, Jamshedpur 831007, Jharkhand, India
2 CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, IMD Centre, PO. Burmamines, Jamshedpur 831007, India
3 Dept. of Library and Information Science, Sambalpur University, ‘Panda Cottage’, Gandhinagar 3rd Line Extn.Berhampur 760001 (Ganjam), Odisha, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of 204 Grant-in-Aid projects carried out at CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, India during 1995-2010 through Bibliometric method. Unearths the impact of projects in the light of current needs to sustain in future. The data pertaining to study were generated through structured questionnaire. The output-identified as deliverables of each project includes, cash flow, process developed, patents, copyright, and technology transferred, academic contribution and research papers published through projects.The quality of papers were traced out through citation and impact factor. The Projects have been classified at different level of research-basic research, applied research, industrial research. The data further presented according to the level of research to accommodate 204 projects. The duration of the projects ranged from 6 months to 5 years. A group of 27 subject areas have been identified for all the projects, fall in the domain of Metallurgy and Materials Sciences and allied subjects.The value of projects were estimated around 55 Crore Rupees. About 97% projects were accomplished in scheduled time. The R&D output reflects that 55 processes were developed and only one technology could be transferred. However 21 technologies are under negotiation for transfer to different parties. During the tennure of projects, 40 patents and 14 copyrights were filed. About 58 students from various reputed academic institutions were benefited through projects. A total of 608 research papers were reported based on projects findings. The trends of publications during 16 years show that SCI papers are in increasing trends and reflects a healthy sign as performance indicators of the sponsored projects. The projects under basic research contributed a maximum of 226 papers with 845 citations, shared 64.50% of the total 1310 citations. The average impact factor of papers was 1.552. The highly cited papers published in the area of water quality-assessment, received 88 Citations, other highly cited papers fall in the domain of corrosion protection and prevention, waste management and utilization and materials science and technology. The output of the present work will be useful for scientists and decision makers to judge the impact of Grant-in-Aid projects in the light of current global scenario and making project selection mechanism more effective by tailoring to the current needs of the society.

Keywords

Grant-in-Aid Projects, R &amp, D Evaluation, CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, Bibliometrics, Metallurgy And Materials Science, Public Goods, Citation Analysis, Impact Factor, Productmetric Study
User
About The Authors

P.N. Mishra
CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, IMD Centre, PO. Burmamines, Jamshedpur 831007, Jharkhand
India

N. G. Goswami
CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, IMD Centre, PO. Burmamines, Jamshedpur 831007
India

K. C. Panda
Dept. of Library and Information Science, Sambalpur University, ‘Panda Cottage’, Gandhinagar 3rd Line Extn.Berhampur 760001 (Ganjam), Odisha
India


Notifications

  • http://bdmserver/e107plugins/content/content.php (accessed on 2.12.2011)

  • UNSECO.The state of Science and technology in the world 1996-1997, 2001, Available at http://www.uis.unesco.org. php? ID2+DO_PRINTPAGE.

  • Ranga, L.M.; Koenraad, D. and Nick Von, T. (2003) Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: A case study of basic vs. applied research in Belgium. Scientometrics, 58(2): 301-320.

  • Chung, S. and Grupp, H. (1990) R&D policies in Germany and their evaluation: R&D promotion policies and evaluation approaches. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 2(1-2): 141-167.

  • Geisler, E. (1994) Key output indicators in performance evaluation of research and development organization. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 47(2): 189-203.

  • Meyer-Krahmer, F. (1995) Technology Policy Evaluation in Germany. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4-6): 601-621.

  • Ran, Anthony F.J. (2000) Socioeconomic impact of R&D: R&D evaluation at the beginning of the new century. Research Evaluation, 8(2): 81-86.

  • Kostoff, R.N. (1994) Quantitative/qualitative federal research impact evaluation practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 45(2): 189-205.

  • Jenkins, B. (1993) Policy analysis: models and approaches In H.Michael (editor).the Policy Process: A Reader (Harvester Wheatsheaf, London); p34-44.

  • Jiancheng, G. and Nan, M.A. (2009) Structural equation model with PLS path modeling for an integrated system of publicly funded basic research. Scientometrics, 81(3): 683–698.

  • Wayne, G. and Barsky, N.P. (1994) Utilizing the balanced scorecard for R&D performance measurement. R&D Management, 34(3): 229-238.

  • Randle, K. (1997) Rewarding failure: operating a performance-related pay system in phararmaceutical research. Personnel Review, 26(3): 187-200.

  • Cameron, K. (1986) A study of organizational effectiveness and its predictors. Management Science, 32(1): 87-112.

  • Connolly, T; Conlon, E.J and Deutsch, S.J. (1980) Organizational effectiveness: a multiple constituency approach. Academy of Management Review. 5: 211-217.

  • Martin, B.R. and Irvine, J. (1983) Assessing basic research: some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy, 12(2): 61-90.

  • Oppenheim, C. (1997) The Correlation between Citation counts and the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise rating for British Research in Genetics, Anatomy and Archeology. Journal of Documentation. 53(5): 477-487.

  • Oppenheim, C. and Norris, M. (2003) Citation counts and the research assessment exercise V: archaeology and the 2001 RAE. Journal of Documentation, 56(6): 709-730.

  • Whitley, R. and Frost, P.A. (1971) The measurement of performance in research. Human Relations. 24(2): 161-78.

  • Grupp, H. (2000) Indicator – assisted evaluation of R&D programme: possibilities, state of the art and case studies. Research Evaluation, 8(2): 87-99.

  • Mela, G.S.; Martinoli, C and Poggi, E.; et. al. (2003) Radiological research in Europe: a Bibliometric study. European Radiology, 13(4): 657-662.

  • Lee, C.K.. (2003) A scientometric study of the research performance of the Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology in Singapore. Scientometrics. 56(1): 95-110.

  • Lee, M; Son, B. and Om, K.. (1996) Evaluation of national R&D projects in Korea. Research Policy, 25(5): 805–818.

  • Brown, W. B. and Gobeli, D. (1992) Observations on the measurement of R&D productivity: A case study. IEEE Transaction Engineering Management, 39(4): 325–331.

  • Chiesa, V. and Masella, C. (1996) Searching for an effective measure of R&D performance. Management Decision, 34(7): 49–57.

  • Hauser, J. R. and Zettelmeyer, F. (1997) Metrics to evaluate R, D, & E. Research Technology Management, 40(4): 32–38.

  • Kerssens-van Drongelen, I. C. and Cook, A. (1997) Design principles for the development of measurement systems for R&D processes. R&D Management, 27(4): 345–357.

  • Poh, K.L; Ang, B.W. and Bai, F. (2002) A comparative analysis of R&D project evaluation methods. R&D Management, 31(1): 63-75.

  • Bitman, W.R. and Sharif, N. (2008) A conceptual framework for ranking R&D projects. IEEE Transaction Engineering Management, 55(2): 267–278.

  • De Bandt, J. (1995) Research and innovation: evaluation problems and procedures at different levels. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4-6): 365-377.

  • Daughton, J.M. (1997) Magnetic tunneling applied to memory. Journal of Applied Physics, 81(8): 3758-3763.

  • Rangarao, B.V. (1967) Scientific Research in India: An analysis of publication. Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research, 26: 166-167.

  • Roy, S; Nagpaul, P.S. and Pratap, K.J.M. (2003) Developing a model to measure the effectiveness of research units. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23(12): 1514-1531.

  • Vittorio, C.; et al. (2009) Performance measurement in R&D: exploring the interplay between measurement objectives, dimensions of performance and contextual factors. R&D Management. 39(5): 487-519.

  • Werner, B.M. and Souder, W.E. (2004) Measuring R&D performance – state-of-the-art. Research. Technology Management, 40(2): 34-42

  • Stahl, M.J. and Steger J.A. (1977) Improving R&D Productivity-Measuring Innovation and Productivity: A Peer Rating Approach. International Journal of Research management, 20(1): 35-38.

  • May, R.M. (1997) The scientific wealth of nation. Science, 275(5301): 793-796.

  • Braun, T. and Schubert, A. (2003) A quantitative view on the coming of age of interdisciplinarity in the science. Scientometrics, 58(1): 183-189.

  • Daigle, R.J. and Arnold, V. (2000) An analysis of the research productivity of AIS faculty. International journal of Accounting Information System, 1(2): 106-122.

  • Guan, Jiancheng and He, Ying. (2005) Comparison and evaluation of domestic and international outputs in information science and technology research of China. Scientometrics, 65(2): 215-244.

  • Brown, M.G. and Svenson, R. (1998) Measuring R&D productivity. Research Technology Management, 1-30. http://www.zigonperf.com/resources/pmnews/measure_ productivity.htm (accessed 10 October 2011).

  • Ojanen, V. and Vuola, O. (2003) Categorizing the Measures and Evaluation Methods of R&D Performance-A State-of-the-art Review on R&D Performance Analysis. Telecom Business Research Centre Lappeenranta, Working papers -16,Lappeenranta University of Technology, 1-22.

  • http://metalsabout.com/library/bldef-Metallurgy.htm (accessedon 7.10.2010).

  • Jansz, M.C.N. (2000) Some thoughts on the interaction between scientometrics and science and technology policy. Scientometrics, .47(2): 253-264.

  • http://sciencewatch.com/about/met/ (accessed on 2.12.2011)

  • Kademani, B.S.; et al. (2007) Research and citation impact of publications by the Chemistry Division of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. Scientometrics, 71(1): 25-27.

  • Mishra, P.N.; Panda, K.C. and Goswami, N.G. (2010) Citation analysis and research impact of National Metallurgical Laboratory, India. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 15(1): 91-113.


Abstract Views: 361

PDF Views: 15




  • Impact of Grant-in-Aid Projects at CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, India: A Bibliometric Study

Abstract Views: 361  |  PDF Views: 15

Authors

P.N. Mishra
CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, IMD Centre, PO. Burmamines, Jamshedpur 831007, Jharkhand, India
N. G. Goswami
CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, IMD Centre, PO. Burmamines, Jamshedpur 831007, India
K. C. Panda
Dept. of Library and Information Science, Sambalpur University, ‘Panda Cottage’, Gandhinagar 3rd Line Extn.Berhampur 760001 (Ganjam), Odisha, India

Abstract


The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of 204 Grant-in-Aid projects carried out at CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, India during 1995-2010 through Bibliometric method. Unearths the impact of projects in the light of current needs to sustain in future. The data pertaining to study were generated through structured questionnaire. The output-identified as deliverables of each project includes, cash flow, process developed, patents, copyright, and technology transferred, academic contribution and research papers published through projects.The quality of papers were traced out through citation and impact factor. The Projects have been classified at different level of research-basic research, applied research, industrial research. The data further presented according to the level of research to accommodate 204 projects. The duration of the projects ranged from 6 months to 5 years. A group of 27 subject areas have been identified for all the projects, fall in the domain of Metallurgy and Materials Sciences and allied subjects.The value of projects were estimated around 55 Crore Rupees. About 97% projects were accomplished in scheduled time. The R&D output reflects that 55 processes were developed and only one technology could be transferred. However 21 technologies are under negotiation for transfer to different parties. During the tennure of projects, 40 patents and 14 copyrights were filed. About 58 students from various reputed academic institutions were benefited through projects. A total of 608 research papers were reported based on projects findings. The trends of publications during 16 years show that SCI papers are in increasing trends and reflects a healthy sign as performance indicators of the sponsored projects. The projects under basic research contributed a maximum of 226 papers with 845 citations, shared 64.50% of the total 1310 citations. The average impact factor of papers was 1.552. The highly cited papers published in the area of water quality-assessment, received 88 Citations, other highly cited papers fall in the domain of corrosion protection and prevention, waste management and utilization and materials science and technology. The output of the present work will be useful for scientists and decision makers to judge the impact of Grant-in-Aid projects in the light of current global scenario and making project selection mechanism more effective by tailoring to the current needs of the society.

Keywords


Grant-in-Aid Projects, R &amp, D Evaluation, CSIR-National Metallurgical Laboratory, Bibliometrics, Metallurgy And Materials Science, Public Goods, Citation Analysis, Impact Factor, Productmetric Study

References