The second Culture Barometer shows that many academics support the programme’s ambitions, but see too little progress yet

 In January 2026, Berenschot carried out the second measurement of the Recognition & Rewards Culture Barometer on behalf of the Recognition & Rewards programme. The Culture Barometer enables knowledge institutions to gauge whether the programme’s ambitions and associated behaviours are recognised, rewarded, and shared on the work floor. It also maps the extent to which the intended culture change is progressing.

The results of the second measurement are both encouraging and confronting. Encouraging, because there is broad support among academics for the ambitions of the Recognition & Rewards programme. Confronting, because academics have noticed too little of the policies that institutions have developed over the past two years.

Broad support for the ambitions

Almost all respondents identify with the five core ambitions of Recognition & Rewards. Fewer than three per cent indicate that they do not. A majority of academics also feel personally recognised and rewarded for the work they do — an important, positive signal. The results further confirm that many academics support the movement towards broader recognition and rewards, and hope for an academic culture with room for diverse talents, collaboration, leadership, impact, open science, and education.

Gap between policy and practice

At the same time, the Culture Barometer shows that many academics experience little change in their day-to-day work. Although over forty per cent see positive developments at policy level, the majority notice little change in systems, culture, and practice.

Some academics view the Recognition & Rewards measures that have been implemented as little more than a paper exercise. Old assessment mechanisms are said to remain dominant, and criteria for appointment and promotion are not always clear. In all fairness, this discrepancy is characteristic of any culture change.

The broad support for the programme’s ambitions, combined with frustration over its implementation, shows that a majority of university staff actually want more change, not less. The results also show that all disciplines broadly support the programme’s ambitions — thereby dispelling the myth that some disciplines value only quantitative metrics.

In recent years, much has changed within institutions in terms of thinking about development, quality, leadership, and careers. This has led to new policies, new processes, and new instruments, with good examples now increasingly visible across institutions. Recognition & Rewards has reached an important juncture: the principles and instruments are increasingly in place, but must become part of everyday behaviour, leadership, and academic practice.

The next step in cultural change

With approximately ten thousand respondents, the Recognition & Rewards Culture Barometer offers a rich and valuable source from which to learn and sharpen the approach. It is therefore important that knowledge institutions listen carefully to the signals and reflections from the work floor. The results show that there is a need for greater transparency, clear communication, and effective implementation of the changes. Middle management has an important role to play here, bridging the gap between policy and daily practice.

The findings thus provide not only cause for reflection, but also practical guidance for institutions to deepen the culture change and embed it sustainably in everyday practice.

The full report of the Recognition & Rewards Culture Barometer is available online.

The partners of the Recognition & Rewards programme are:

• UNL
• NWO
• UMCNL
• ZonMw
• KNAW
• NLU

Towards recognising and rewarding all academic contributions

The Recognition & Rewards movement is rooted in a clear ambition: to create a healthy working environment in which every talent matters. To achieve this, we work from a shared vision: broadening the recognition and rewarding of academic work, with explicit attention to collaboration and diverse contributions.

We invite you into our vision of academia as an ecosystem. This visualisation illustrates where we come from, where we stand today, and where we aspire to go.

How do you see the ecosystem of academia? What do you recognise — and what do you not recognise — in this visualisation? Click on the snapshots in the PDF to further explore examples, practices and developments from across the movement.

Download the PDF

In this episode, programme manager Sanli Faez speaks with Dr Alex Rushforth, a scholar in the sociology of science and science policy. His research focuses on research evaluation, bibliometrics, science governance and science and technology studies.

Alex recently wrote a critical commentary on the Netherlands’ Recognition & Rewards programme. He argues that:
“The initiative has been largely effective in mobilising formal organisational support from key stakeholders in Dutch research, but significant vulnerabilities remain — particularly regarding uncertain buy-in and implementation by rank-and-file academics, the ultimate implementers of the envisioned changes.”

Reflecting on their conversation, Sanli notes:
“What I learned from Alex is that it’s possible to look inside the workings of committees with empathy for their role — as they translate new evaluation criteria and policy documents into everyday academic practice.”

Together, they discuss the double role of academics: as employees of universities, and as gatekeepers of scientific knowledge and careers. For real reform in research assessment, change must happen consistently across both roles.

🎙️ Listen to episode one of Fairly Recognised — available now on Substack, ITunes and Spotify.
https://sanlifaez.substack.com/p/are-we-nearly-there-yet?r=8vdl6&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true

ZonMw and NWO have jointly published their action plan for reforming research assessment, in line with the principles of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). The plan not only highlights the progress made so far but also sets a roadmap of concrete actions through to 2027. These include reviewing and refining the evidence-based CV and exploring open science practices in grant evaluations.