Changing proxies for evaluating research performance : what matters to university programme heads?

Abstract

The tourism and hospitality research and publishing landscape have faced radical changes over the last decade. As a result, there have been calls for more holistic approaches for evaluating an academic’s research performance. Yet, updated research on the perceptions of what constitutes ‘good’ research performance remain under-studied. To address this gap, the objective of this study is to examine how current university programme heads in tourism and hospitality evaluate and define ‘good’ research performance. In doing so, this study offers insights to academics on how the goal posts are indeed shifting for performance evaluation, and provides information for programme heads to assess the relative salience of their own research targets.