No more enumerations of number of publications and leading journals, but a narrative resume paying attention to the scientist as a person. The introduction of the Biographical Sketch (aka Bio-sketch) is “quite a change”, says Julma Braat, policy advisor for Recognition and Rewards at Human Resources Management (HRM). This is mainly due to the narrative nature of the document, she believes. “It demands a different way of thinking and more preparation. Candidates will now have to describe what kind of scientist they are – and want to be – and what they’ve achieved in the areas of education, research, impact, and leadership.” And all of this in a clear and concise document, covering no more than five A4 standard pages.

This means candidates have to spend more time thinking about how they wish to present themselves; not everyone believes this is progress. “The feedback we received at first is that it was no longer about your achievements, but about how good you are at presenting them. We tried to eliminate this risk by combining the narrative element with a quantitative one. You have to provide evidence for your claims.” So this also applies to achievements in the areas of education, impact, and leadership. “We are currently working on clarifying the indicators for education. After all, it’s easier to provide evidence for research than for education. But indicators do exist for the latter as well.”

In fact, there are indicators for all of the four themes the candidates have to write about: education, research, impact, and leadership. A candidate can decide for themselves what to focus on. It may well be the case that someone concentrates on education, but also contributes to research, Braat explains. “So then you might not be the first author, but you are involved. That’s exactly the type of thing you can indicate in the Bio-sketch.”

Publications

In other words, the Bio-sketch should allow a candidate to better explain the numbers. Conventional metrics such as the h-index, which looks at the number of publications and citations, are too limited according to Braat. “What you see is that it’s very high in some fields, but one of the things the index doesn’t consider is whether it concerns a new field.” She’s also not sold on the Journal Impact Factor, which indicates how often a scientific journal is quoted, as a means of assessing people. “It says something about the journal, not about the person.” Whether the members of a BAC actually won’t look at the h-index or JIF is still a point of concern, Braat acknowledges. “It shouldn’t be the case, of course, that someone’s written a wonderful Bio-sketch but the BAC members are still intent on looking up the h index.”

Training courses and e-learning modules could help make this change, she thinks. “And every BAC has members of interdepartmental committees, who were involved in the creation of the Bio-sketch. So that voice is definitely represented within the BACs.” According to Braat, the deans are also on board with the new method. “But we do want to reach everyone. A few years ago there was so much resistance, but if we make the effort to explain the concept properly, that does help. For instance, the other day my colleague and I went to Applied Physics to tell the scientific staff about Bio-sketch. It turned out it wasn’t such a big change for them, as they’re already used to writing something about impact and leadership.”

Pilot

The candidates from IE&IS and ME that already used Bio-sketch in a 2022 pilot 2022 were largely positive. “They were happy that attention was being paid to the quality of their work. They were also satisfied with the equal distribution across the domains.” Now it’s a matter of waiting to see whether candidates at other departments will feel the same way. Either way, an adjustment period will be in order, Braat expects. “And we hope to provide more and more guidance along the way.”