Abstract

New Public Management with its quantifiable and tangible measurements has been used to measure research and publication productivities of academics in universities around the world. However, such measurements have created much debate regarding their effectiveness, credibility, and accuracy to measure what should be measured to determine the productivities of academics and, thus, determine the quality of academics and their institutions. This trend is growing in Indonesia as well, and such measurements in Indonesian universities have triggered tensions and contestations, highlighting public media of communication. This, thus, tends to polarise the opinions of Indonesian academics. A number of academics cogently contend that such measures that foreground numbers and figures tend to undermine the basic meaning and basic underlying values embodied in the process of conducting research- and wish to opt these out from their academic work. While others agree that the publications and their citations (h-index) are reliable tools to judge the quality and capacity of researchers. Consequently, indeed, this h-index may haphazardly divide academics into top ranking academics and lowest ranking academics that can be evidently seen from the Science Index and Technology (SINTA) set-up by the Indonesian government.

Keywords:Quantitative measurements; Quality; Ranking; H-index; Higher education