Assessment of the Factors Affecting Academic Research Performance of Select Indian Private Universities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54741/MJAR/6.4.2026.326Keywords:
research performance, management practices, research predictors, research outputAbstract
Purpose: The globe aspires to better its performance in this competitive climate because improving performance is a universal desire in many domains, including academics. Consequently, the higher education sector is paving the path for a more refined, capable, adaptable, and sustainable future. Many Indian private universities are working hard to expand their global presence. But unable to make their presence felt within the top 100 globally. According to research studies, three critical dimensions for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are teaching quality, research quality, and globalization, with the latter two receiving little emphasis(Prakash, 2018). Our research will primarily focus on academic research performance among these dimensions. Academic research performance is a significant challenge for sustainable performance and development. Academic research performance can be conceptually understood by breaking the term into two syllables: research and performance(Bazeley P., 2010). The purpose of this empirical research is to identify theimpact of the factors on academic research performance in the selected state private universities of India.In this quantitative research, the participants comprised 335 faculty members from selected state private universities, conducted in four states of India: Assam, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab and Rajasthan. Primary data were collected by administering a survey questionnaire with an instrument that consists of 29 items across a 5-pointLikert scale for all the constructs. Based on t-statistics and p-values, learning and development, reward and recognition, and research funds are not significant, whereas research collaboration is significantly related to academic research performance in the Indian context. The findings would allow stakeholders to optimize processes, improve outcomes, assist researchers and institutions to advance knowledge, and manage societal concerns effectively.
Downloads
References
Aldieri, L., Kotsemir, M., & Vinci, C. (2018). The impact of research collaboration on academic performance: An empirical analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 62, 13-30.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bagozzi, R. P., Wong, N., & Yi, Y. (1999). The role of culture and gender in the relationship between positive and negative affect. Cognition & Emotion, 13(6), 641–672.
Bazeley, P. (2003). Defining 'Early Career" in research. Higher Education, 45, 257-279. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022698529612
Bazeley, P. (2010). Conceptualising research performance. Studies in Higher Education, 35(8), 889-903. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903348404
Beerkens, M. (2013). Facts and fads in academic research management: The effect of management practices on research productivity in Australia. Research Policy, 42(9), 1679-1693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.014
Bilal, B., Guraya, S., & Chen, S. (2017). The impact and effectiveness of faculty development program in fostering the faculty's knowledge, skills, and professional competence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 26(4).
Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2014). Research collaboration and team science: A state-of-the-art review and agenda. Springer Publishing.
Choudhri, A. F. (2015). Understanding bibliometric parameters and analysis. Radiographics, 35(3), 736-746. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015140036
Choudhri, A. F., Siddiqui, A., Khan, N. R., & Cohen, H. L. (2015). Understanding bibliometric parameters and analysis. Radiographics, 35(3). https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015140036
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta‐analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445.
Edgar, F., & Geare, A. (2011). Factors influencing university research performance. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 774-792. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.601811
Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., & Pretz, J. (1998). Can the promise of reward increase creativity?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 70-79. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.74.3.704
Forza, C., & Filippini, R. (1998). TQM impact on quality conformance and customer satisfaction: A causal model. International Journal of Production Economics, 55(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00007-3
Garver, M. S., & Williams, Z. (2009). Examining a model of understanding customer value and satisfaction data. Marketing Management Journal, 19(1), 113–132.
Gaskin J. & Lim, J. (2016). Model fit measures, AMOS plugin. Retrieved 2024, from Gaskination Stat Wiki: https://statwiki.gaskination.com/index.php/Plugins
Ghozali, I., & Latan, H. (2015). Partial least squares konsep, metode dan aplikasi menggunakan program WARPPLS 4.0. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Gralka, S., Wohlrabe, K., & Bornmann, L. (2019). How to measure research efficiency in higher education? Research grants vs. publication output. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 41(3), 322-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2019.15884
Hair Jr, J. B. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Haley, A. A. (2022). Internationalisation through research collaboration. Educational Review, 76(4), 675-690. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2054958
Hassan, A., Tymms, P., & Ismail, H. (2008). Academic productivity as perceived by Malaysian academics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(3), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800802155184
Hicks, D. (2012). Performance-based university research funding systems. Research Policy, 41(2), 251-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.007
Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2011). The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. . Journal of Public Economics, 1168–1177.
Juliandi, A. (2018). Structural equation model based partial least square (SEM-PLS): Menggunakan SmartPLS. Modul Pelatihan. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1243777
Katz, J., & Martin, B. (1997). What is research collaboration?. Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18.
Kelly, N., Doyle, J., & Parker, M. (2019). Methods for assessing higher education research team collaboration: Comparing research outputs and participant perceptions across four collaborative research teams. Higher Education Research and Development, 39(2), 215-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1676199
Kline, R. B. (2005). Methodology in the social sciences.
Kozhakhmet, S., Moldashev, K., Yenikeyeva, A., & Nurgabdeshov, A. (2020). How training and development practices contribute to research productivity: a moderated mediation model. Studies in Higher Education, 47(2), 437-449.
Laudel, G. (2005). Is external research funding a valid indicator for research performance?. Research Evaluation, 14(1), 27-34. doi:10.3152/147154405781776300
Laudel, G. (2005). Is external research funding a valid indicator for research performance?. Research Evaluation, 14(1), 27–34.
Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673-702.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling . Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
MacGregor, R., Rix, M., Aylward, D., & Glynn, J. (2006). Factors Associated with Research Management in Australian Commerce and Business Faculties. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(1), 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800500283858
Mazmanian, P., Coe, A., Evans, J., Longo, D., & Wright, B. (2014). Are researcher development interventions, alone or in any combination, effective in improving researcher behavior? A systematic review. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 37(1), 131-165.
Medsker, G. J. (1994). A review of current practices for evaluating causal models in organizational behavior and human resources management research. Journal of Management, 20(2), 439–464.
O’Meara, K. (2011). Inside the panopticon: Studying academic reward systems. In J. Smart, & M. Paulsen, Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (pp. 161-220). Iowa, USA: Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0702-3_5
Padlee, S. F., Reimers, V., Ahmad, A., Anuar, M. M., & Mokhlis, S. (2020). Keep up the good work in research universities: An importance-performance analysis. Australasian Marketing Journal, 28(2), 128-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2019.10.002
Perdomo-Ortiz, J., Valencia, C., Durán, W., & Oswaldo. (2021). Effect of high-performance work practices on academic research productivity. Latin American Business Review, 22(2), 189-214. https://doi.org/10.1080/10978526.2020.1837632
Perdomo-Ortiz, J., Valencia, C., Fernando Durán, W., & Heredia, O. (2020). Effect of high-performance work practices on academic research productivity. Latin American Business Review, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10978526.2020.1837632
Pinar, M. (2019). It is not all about performance: Importance of the funding formula in the allocation of performance-based research funding in England. Research Evaluation, 29(1), 100-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvz030
Prakash, G. (2018). Quality in higher education institutions: insights from the literature. The TQM Journal, 30(6), 732-748. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-04-2017-0043
Quimbo, M. A., & Sulabo, E. C. (2013). Research productivity and its policy implications in higher education institutions. Studies in Higher Education, 39(10), 1955-1971. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.818639
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology.
Salahuddin, M., & Stupnisky, R. (2025). University faculty research competence: A systematic literature review of core components, distinctions, and measures. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 11(1), 81-95.
Seijts, G., & Latham, G. (2005). Learning versus performance goals: When should each be used?. Academy of Management Perspectives, 19(1). doi:10.5465/AME.2005.15841964
Soderstrom, N., & Bjork, R. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569000
Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Anderson, B., Barnett, B., Centeno, A., Naismith, L., . . . Spencer, J. (2016). Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Anderson, B., et al. (2016). A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to enhance teaching effectiveness: A 10-year update. Medical Teacher, 38(8), 769–786.
Tenenhaus, M. (2004). PLS tegression and PLS path modelling for multiple table analysis. COMPSTAT- Proceedings in Computational Statistics, pp. 489-499.
Tilak, J. (2010). The Search for New Governance of Higher Education in Asia. in The Search for New Governance of Higher Education in Asia, pp. 171-191. doi10.1057/9780230111554_11
Tilak, J. B. (2020). Dilemmas in reforming higher education in India. Higher Education for the Future, 7(1), 1-13. doi:10.1177/2347631119886417
Tones, M., & Pillay, H. (2008). The learning and development survey: Further evaluation of its psychometric properties. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 8, 85-97.
Valadkhani, A., & Worthington, A. (2007). Ranking and clustering Australian university research performance, 1998–2002. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(2), 189-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800600751101
Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley and Sons.
Xu, X., Oancea, A., & Rose, H. (2021). The impacts of incentives for international publications on research cultures in Chinese humanities and social sciences. Minerva, 59, 469–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-021-09441-w
Youtie, J., & Bozeman, B. 1.-9. (2014). Social dynamics of research collaboration: norms, practices, and ethical issues in determining co-authorship rights. Scientometrics, 101(2), 953-962. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1391-7
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Adreeja Chowdhury, Dr. Arvind Hans, Dr. Ashutosh Muduli
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Research Articles in 'Management Journal for Advanced Research' are Open Access articles published under the Creative Commons CC BY License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. This license allows you to share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
