Bibliometric indicators can be a useful source of information, yet they also can be very narrow and limited measures and should not be used in isolation, and journal metrics should never be used to evaluate the quality or impact of an individual article or researcher.
Recent reports and initiatives of responsible metrics include:
The Metric Tide in 2015 has made a series of recommendations to promote how metrics and indicators can be developed and applied in more positive and responsible ways. DORA, Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics, and Hong Kong Principles for Assessing Researchers are also efforts to improve the ways in which the assessments of research output can be more open and transparent. CoARA sets a shared direction for changes in research assessment practices, with the overarching goal to maximise the quality and impact of research.
In Finland, introducing and developing a national recommendation for utilising responsible metrics became one important task of the Culture of Open Scholarship expert panel of Avoin Tiede, part of the joint efforts by the entire research community in Finland to promote open science. The first national recommendations of the research community for responsible researcher evaluation have been completed. Read the national recommendations: Good practice in researcher evaluation. Recommendation for the responsible evaluation of a researcher in Finland.
See also Moving towards more responsible metrics – a case of Tampere University.
Hanken has signed the DORA and CoARA, and is committed to supporting the principles of responsible research evaluation. Please see Hanken's guidelines on transparent and responsible research evaluation.