Abstract

This paper investigates the impact of metrification on the sense of

human flourishing academics gain through their research practices. Broadly

speaking, human flourishing offers an overarching conception of human

wellbeing associated with positive outcomes such as health, life satisfaction,

meaning and purpose. Academic work can act as a pathway towards human

flourishing. The value of research is increasingly measured through researchmetrics, including individual, journal or institutional rankings. Extensive

literature on metrification argues that the increasing use of metrics is

detrimental to scholarship and to academic freedom. Drawing on in-depth

interviews with academics in a business school at an Australian university,

we report on attitudes towards metrics and their impact on human flourishing.

Our findings reveal a plurality of attitudes and adherence towards such

metrics, ranging from skepticism and distrust, to indifference, and even

appreciation and acceptance. An emphasis on measurable outputs within

increasingly managerial universities narrows the focus of academic work and

reduces opportunities for the important, yet less quantifiable, aspects of

scholarly work that contribute to academic wellbeing. We argue that the

digitalization of work practices and evaluation reshapes behavior and

professional values, producing unintended and unobserved outcomes that

undermine human flourishing.

Share

COinS