1. Evaluation System of Government –Funded Research Institutes 2011. 11. 3 Woo Chul Chai Research Fellow R&D Program Evaluation Division

2. Conclusion Ⅳ.Ⅳ. Ⅳ.Ⅳ. Contents Outline Ⅰ.Ⅰ. Ⅰ.Ⅰ. Utilizations of Evaluation Results Ⅲ.Ⅲ. Ⅲ.Ⅲ. Directions and Evaluation System Ⅱ.Ⅱ. Ⅱ.Ⅱ.

3. Ⅰ. Outline

4. 1 1 1. Purpose and Object To Set up Roles of GRIs and Promote R&D Productivity through Reviewing Research- and Management-Performances 36 Government-funded Research Institutes under the MEST, DAPA, etc. Management Performances Research Performances Comprehensive Performance Purpose Object Section

5. 2 2 1991 Performed by the Prime Minister’s Office 22 GRIs evaluated together According to the Evaluation Results, Merge and Abolition of some GRIs made 1998 Benchmark of Foreign GRIs 1999-2005 4 Research Councils were Established Each Research Council performed Evaluation of Affiliated Institutes The First Evaluation Management Diagnosis by Foreign Consultant Research Council System 2006- Achievement of Performance Goals in R&D and Management Evaluated 2. History of Evaluation System Performance-based Evaluation System

6. 3. Structure of GRIs’ Evaluation Meta-Evaluation Self -Evaluation 3 3 Ministry of Education & Science Technology Ministry of Education & Science Technology Ministry of Knowledge Economy Ministry of Knowledge Economy National S&T Council MEST (KISTEP) KRCF ISTK DAPA Manag -ment KAIST, etc Research project Manag -ement KIST, etc Research project Manag -ement KRISS, etc Research project ADD

7. Ⅱ. Directions and Evaluation System

8. 1. Directions (’11) To Alleviate Burden of Researchers, Evaluation Interval in Management Section is Expanded ※ 1 Year Every 3 years Alleviation of Evaluation Burden Reinforcement of Utilization of Evaluation Results For Promoting Effective Performance of the Mission and Function of GRIs, Consulting is Provided to the GRIs concerning the Appropriate Direction of R&D, etc. Provision of Consulting 5 5 Depending on Evaluation Results, Budget is Allocated Differently to Research Programs (10% Decrease of Budget to Unsatisfactory Programs)

9. 6 6 2. Evaluation Sections (Self- Eval.)SectionObjectIntervalItems Research Performance Projects funded by Government 3 years- Achievement of Performance Objectives Management Performance Management Activities 1 year - Improvements of Management Activities and Achievement of Management Goals Comprehensive Performance Comprehensive R&D and Management Performance 3 years - Qualitative Evaluation concerning the Development Strategy of Institutes in R&D and Management

10. 8 8 3. Criteria in the Evaluation of Management Performance (Self- Eval.) Evaluation ItemsIndicators Establishment of Vision and Strategy of Institute Excellence of President’s Leadership and Level of Achievement of Management Goals Efforts of Promoting S&T Culture Achievement of Monitoring Improvements and Utilization of Internal- and External -Evaluation Results Efforts for Customer’s Satisfaction Development of Human Resources Employment of Excellent Manpower and Establishment of Global Research Networks Efficiency of Institute Management and Utilization of Manpower Research Management System Establishment of Cooperative System among Academia, Institutes and Industry Utilization of Performance Management System Utilization of Knowledge Management System Budget and Finance Management Clarity of Budget Management and Execution

11. 4. Criteria of Meta-Evaluation To Review the Appropriateness of Self-Evaluation System 9 9 ItemsIndicators 1. Appropriateness of Evaluation Plan (30) Appropriateness of Evaluation Objectives Appropriateness of Evaluation Planning Appropriateness of Evaluation System (Indicator, Weight, etc) 2. Appropriateness of Evaluation Process (35) Fairness of Evaluation Committee’s Composition and Operation Appropriateness of Evaluation Indicators and Methods Fairness of Evaluation Execution 3. Effectiveness of Evaluation Results (35) Composition of Evaluation Report Objectiveness of Evaluation Results Appropriate Utilization of Evaluation Results

12. 5. 5. Grade of Meta-Evaluation Grade is Divided into 5 Level Final Grade : “Appropriateness (above 70)” or “Inappropriateness (under 71)” - Adding up the Score of 3 Evaluation Items GradeScoreRemarks Excellent100 - 91 “Appropriate” Good90 – 81 Moderate80 – 71 Bad70 – 61 “Inappropriate” Worst60 - 10

13. Ⅲ. Utilization of Eval. Results

14. 12 1. Utilization of Evaluation Results Evaluation Results of Management Performance - Increase or Decrease of Operating Cost of GRIs (±10%) - Increase or Decrease of President’s Annual Salary of GRIs Evaluation Results of R&D Performance - Decrease of Budget in Unsatisfactory Projects ( - 10% ) - Increase of Budget in Excellent Projects ( + 10%) Evaluation Results of Comprehensive Performance - Guideline for Planning of Research Projects and R&D Directions

15. Ⅳ. Conclusion

16. 1. Improvements To Introduce the Absolute Evaluation System that Reflects the Characteristics of R&D Institutes - GRIs are Classified into 3-4 Groups by the Research Area To Alleviate Burdens by Simplifying the Indicators in the Evaluation of Management Performance - Deleting the Indicators related with R&D such as ‘No. of Patents’, ‘No. of Technology Transfer’, etc. To Reinforce the Specialization of Evaluation - Expanding the Tenure of Evaluation Committee Members 14

17. Thank You !