Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Edith Cowan University (Australia), a Silver-band university.  See a world-leading example (Oxford) →

The enhanced fact file

Your entire collaboration network, read like a strategist would.

Not a scorecard. A dossier that tells a university leader exactly where the strengths, the risks and the fundable opportunities are, every figure sourced from the open research record.

โ—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
12,010
co-authored works, 5 years
976
partner universities
75
partner countries
548
sustained deep ties
4.10
collaboration impact (FWCI)
93%
of partners non-redundant

The one-screen strategic read

Where you stand, at a glance.

The first thing a leader needs is not more data, it is a verdict. Three strengths to lead with, three challenges to manage, three opportunities to act on, each drawn straight from the network below.

Strengths
  • Business, Management & Accounting is the standout field. Ranked #174 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #262, Health Professions #288 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. Edith Cowan University sits in the 98th percentile for impact and the 87th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 95 of 102 partners (93%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 45th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,098 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Australia and China) carry about 70% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-94 globally in Social Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. La Trobe University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.3). Formalise it into a funded consortium to compound impact, not just volume.

Scholarly weight

The impact behind the network

Collaboration only counts if the work lands. This is the citation weight of everything produced with partners, the substance under the network.

371
h-index of the joint research base
1.6M
citations to co-authored work
4.10
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
12,010
co-authored works, 2021-2025
79
collaboration efficiency, impact per tie

Visualisation 1

Your collaboration profile

Seven pillars, each shown as a global percentile. The dashed ring marks the top-decile benchmark; anything inside it is a genuine, defensible strength.

Influence45th pctReach58th pctDiversity51st pctSustained49th pctImpact98th pctInternational87th pctBrokerage72nd pct

Edith Cowan University is strongest on impact (98th percentile), international (87th) and reach (58th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 95 of 102 partners (93%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (45th percentile), the softest of the six and the clearest place to build.

Source: the open global research record, co-authored works 2021–2025, fractional counting

The anatomy of your standing

Exactly what your position is built from

Six pillars, each weighted, combine into one standing index. Nothing is hidden: this is the entire calculation, in a single bar.

InflImpaSustReacDiveInteEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight45th pct+9.9
Impact18% weight98th pct+17.6
Sustained18% weight49th pct+8.8
Reach16% weight58th pct+9.3
Diversity16% weight51st pct+8.2
International10% weight87th pct+8.7

Brokerage is reported alongside as a diagnostic, not folded into the score, so a university cannot inflate its standing simply by publishing widely. It measures whether you connect communities that would otherwise stay apart.

Visualisation 2

Where you lead the world, by field

Each subject placed on a log scale of world rank (1 to 1,195). The further left, the more globally central. Gold marks a top-50 standout, blue a solid position.

#1#10#100#1000Business, Management &โ€ฆ174Nursing262Health Professions288Energy290Engineering336Social Sciences358
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Edith Cowan University's strongest connected fields are Business, Management & Accounting #174, Nursing #262, Health Professions #288. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #1,098 in the deep-dive below, is the clear at-risk area, exactly the gap this chart surfaces.

Source: subject-level indices, 26 fields, minimum 50-university gate

Discipline deep-dive

How you collaborate, faculty by faculty

The same network split into its four broad domains, each with its world rank for connected research and the five partners it leans on most. This is the view a dean or pro-vice-chancellor acts on.

Health & Medicine
World #709 for connected research
41/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Wesโ€ฆ782
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Curtin University436
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Melโ€ฆ320
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Sydโ€ฆ289
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queโ€ฆ260
Life Sciences
World #1098 for connected research
8/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Wesโ€ฆ179
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Curtin University103
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Capital Medical Univeโ€ฆ78
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Melโ€ฆ69
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queโ€ฆ68
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #986 for connected research
18/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Wesโ€ฆ233
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Curtin University206
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Adeโ€ฆ152
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queโ€ฆ130
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ UNSW Sydney120
Social Sciences
World #698 for connected research
42/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Wesโ€ฆ259
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Curtin University229
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Murdoch University134
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Melโ€ฆ119
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Sydโ€ฆ80
Source: domain-level co-authorship, partner institutions 2021–2025

Visualisation 3

Which partnerships actually pay off

Every anchor partner plotted by collaboration volume against the citation impact of the joint work. The prize quadrant is top-right: high volume and high impact. The bottom-right is the trap: a lot of output, little impact.

Joint works (collaboration volume) →Impact (FWCI) →high yieldThe University of Curtin UniversityThe University of La Trobe Universit
High yieldStandardLow yield

La Trobe University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.3): a consortium waiting to happen. The University of Melbourne, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Western Australia1,384 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Curtin University965 3.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Murdoch University514 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland487 3.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Melbourne483 2.9Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Sydney470 4.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University350 3.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Macquarie University303 3.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ UNSW Sydney300 4.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ La Trobe University284 4.3Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 8,000
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 2,253
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,758
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 1,277
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 391
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ New Zealand 359
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 330
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 321

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Western Australia 1,384
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Curtin University 965
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Murdoch University 514
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland 487
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Melbourne 483
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Sydney 470
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University 350
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Macquarie University 303

The network spans 75 countries and 976 universities, but the top two carry about 70% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (9 of the region's 100 leading collaborators) is the clearest gap to close.

Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 6

The partners to win next

Not a generic wish-list. Globally central universities you are not yet deeply partnered with, each with the reason it matters and the specific programme that would fund the collaboration.

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-94 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-35 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Edinburgh United Kingdom · world top-9

University of Edinburgh is top-68 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

Source: network white-space analysis + funder-programme mapping

The research base

The ecosystem behind the collaboration

A partnership does not plug into a name, it plugs into a base: the affiliated hospitals, presses, institutes and archives, and the research themes where the joint work concentrates.

Digitisation Centre of Western Australia
Medicine

Context

Your competitive set, and your signature research

Benchmarked against

The named peer group your fact file compares you to, pillar by pillar and subject by subject.

๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Universidad Complutense de MadridSpain
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น University of CataniaItaly
Cairo UniversityEG
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Louisiana State UniversityUnited States
Sports Performance and TrainingSports injuries and preventionDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsCancer survivorship and careCardiovascular and exercise physiology

From insight to action

A 90-day plan, written from the data.

The dossier ends where a strategy meeting begins: three moves, sequenced, each pointing back to a specific finding above.

0-30 days
Name the target

Adopt HKU and a Europe hub as formal partnership targets; brief the relevant deans with the joint white-space evidence.

30-60 days
Open the funding route

Scope the specific programme for each target, and turn the La Trobe University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence gap and the life sciences weakness; set a diversification target for the long tail; and secure an editorial feature in the reputation-survey window.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for Edith Cowan University.

Everything above is the open view. The full partner fact file goes further: every ranked subject and subfield, the complete partner ledger with yield, your named academics and their signature work, the funder-by-funder route map for each target, and this same dossier on up to ten named peers.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, Tuesday 25 August 2026 to be included at the 15 September launch.

See the full enhanced fact file → Claim & verify yours

Free to claim and verify your data. No obligation. Your ranking is unaffected by partnership, and always will be.

Exclusive to partners

Plus this same dossier on up to 10 of your peers.

Every partnership includes the full intelligence on your named competitive set, their strengths, their funders, their white-space, so you can see exactly where you lead and where to close the gap. Two peers with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 170,000 academics, with full reporting.

Partnership also places your research as editorial features in the Research Network Report, our newsletter to a verified global academic audience, timed to the reputation-survey season. Every send comes with a full performance report: opens, clicks and geography, benchmarked against the edition.

The Research Network Report

170,000
verified academic subscribers worldwide
Nov–Jan
timed to the reputation-survey season
Full report
opens, clicks and geography on every feature

See your own dossier, built for your university.

Submit your data and we will build and review your enhanced fact file with you, then show exactly how a partnership turns it into advantage, before the index goes public on 15 September 2026.

Request a partnership conversation →
Global Research Partnerships · globalresearchpartnerships.com/rci · Built on the open global research record and the award data of the world's major funders. Methodology.