Performance Metrics for Institutional Reviews

🤡 One of the more absurd metrics U.S. maritime academies rely on is the U.S. News Report. Maritime academies often receive a perfect 5/5 simply because the rankings are weighted almost entirely on salaries. Yes, maritime officers do earn more than the average college graduate—but that has little to do with the quality of the schools themselves. A more accurate set of measures would include: ✅ The officer rank and sea time of MTRA and MENG faculty. ✅ The quality of administrators—for example, whether they align the school’s mission with the needs of the commercial maritime industry. ✅ The safety record of the training ship, as documented in USCG MISLE. ✅ Alignment with IMO goals. ✅ International collaboration. (Read: shipping is global) ✅ Enrollment levels. And there are more. All of these should be wrapped into clear KPIs, with MARAD holding schools accountable to them using their MOUs. If a school repeatedly falls below a threshold then outside remedial action is necessary. We have normalized the poor performance of some—though not all—academies in the U.S. If we truly want to grow as a maritime nation, we need real performance data, not a shallow marketing gimmick like U.S. News. Project Harrison

How do large organizations really measure success? Most private-sector companies can show you quarterly targets, performance dashboards, and forward-looking indicators that gauge growth, not just survival. These aren’t vague aspirations. They’re metrics that inform decisions, shape strategy, and hold teams accountable. Now look at some of our more “corporate” government headquarters tasked with managing the institution, not leading formations in the field. What do we use? Mission statements. Compliance inspections. Retrospective audits. These tools may tell us where we’ve been, but they don’t tell us where we’re going. They help us surge to meet short-term needs but rarely support thriving over time. The difference between managing the status quo and building the future is whether you’re measuring growth, not just function. Whether you’re defining what “better” looks like—or simply proving you’re not broken. In the realm of talent management, what would thriving metrics look like? • % of billets filled with Marines whose skills match the mission • Rate of high-potential talent progressing into key developmental roles • Time from innovation to institutional adoption • Predictive accuracy of workforce planning models • Voluntary retention in critical specialties • Lateral mobility across components or specialties aligned to individual goals and institutional needs • Speed and simplicity of human capital processes at the user level Mission statements don’t drive improvement. Metrics do. Especially when they’re tied to goals that stretch us—goals that demand better, not just functional. So, what’s your scoreboard measuring? Are you managing a system… or designing one that thrives?

Measuring Research and Innovation Outputs Research and Innovation are key drivers of progress in academia, leading to new discoveries, technologies, and ways of thinking that can have a profound impact on the world. However, measuring the research and innovation capacity and output of a university can be a complex challenge. What metrics should be used, and how can universities effectively track and assess their research and innovative activities? One important factor to consider is research productivity. The number and quality of publications, patents, and other intellectual property generated by a university's faculty can be a strong indicator of innovative thinking and problem-solving. Citation impact, or how frequently a university's research is referenced by others in the field, is another useful metric. Universities can also track the commercialization of their innovations, such as the number of startup companies spun out or licensing deals made. Beyond traditional research outputs, universities should also look at more holistic measures. This could include the number of interdisciplinary collaborations, number and quality of doctoral programs, number and quality of international conferences, number and quality of international academic partnerships, joint publications, quality of research labs, amount of internal funding, the diversity of research topics and methodologies, the speed of knowledge transfer to real-world applications, and the university's ability to attract top talent and external funding (from industry and research funding agencies) for innovative initiatives. Student-led projects, hackathons, and entrepreneurship programs are other important indicators of a culture of innovation. In addition to academic impact through publications and citations, the social, economic, health, environmental, and quality of life impact should also be measured. Qualitative assessments can supplement quantitative metrics. Interviews, case studies, and peer reviews can provide valuable insights into the quality, creativity, and impact of a university's innovations. Gathering feedback from industry partners, community stakeholders, and other external collaborators can also shed light on the university's ability to drive meaningful change. Ultimately, a multifaceted approach is needed to accurately gauge a university's research and innovative capacity. By tracking a balanced set of quantitative and qualitative measures, institutions can identify their strengths, pinpoint areas for improvement, and ensure they are delivering on their mission to advance knowledge and positively transform society. At ADU, Research and Innovation is led by my esteemed colleague Professor Montasir Qasymeh and all the above measures are taken into account when measuring our research and innovation outputs. Please provide your views if I have missed any important measures. #Research #Innovation #ADU Hamad Odhabi Khulud Abdallah Abu Dhabi University

New The Institute of Internal Auditors Inc. Guidance Available: Performance Measurement Tool Effective performance measurement is essential for demonstrating the value of internal audit and ensuring conformance with the Global Internal Audit Standards™. This new guidance provides: ✅ A clear purpose for performance measurement in internal audit. ✅ A structured design process for meaningful and reliable metrics. ✅ Practical implementation guidance to drive engagement and accountability. ✅ A collection of examples, including performance measures, reporting options, and stakeholder survey questions. Chief Audit Executives can use this tool to develop a measurement framework tailored to their organization’s needs. https://lnkd.in/gt2V23ky