Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for La Trobe 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.

β—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
37,333
co-authored works, 5 years
1,107
partner universities
78
partner countries
784
sustained deep ties
2.20
collaboration impact (FWCI)
92%
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
  • Decision Sciences is the standout field. Ranked #83 in the world for connected research, with Health Professions #85 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on reach and sustained. La Trobe University sits in the 84th percentile for reach and the 75th for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 93 of 101 partners (92%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Impact is the softest pillar. At the 34th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #511 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 United States) carry about 71% 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 Yale University. World top-17. Yale University is top-71 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. The University of Adelaide returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 7.0). 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.

533
h-index of the joint research base
4.3M
citations to co-authored work
2.20
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
37,333
co-authored works, 2021-2025
52
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.

Influence73rd pctReach84th pctDiversity71st pctSustained75th pctImpact34th pctInternational47th pctBrokerage64th pct

La Trobe University is strongest on reach (84th percentile), sustained (75th) and influence (73rd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 93 of 101 partners (92%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Impact (34th 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 pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight73rd pct+16.1
Impact18% weight34th pct+6.1
Sustained18% weight75th pct+13.5
Reach16% weight84th pct+13.4
Diversity16% weight71st pct+11.4
International10% weight47th pct+4.7

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#1000Decision Sciences83Health Professions85
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

La Trobe University's strongest connected fields are Decision Sciences #83, Health Professions #85. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #511 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 #197 for connected research
84/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Mel…1,675
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University1,516
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Syd…505
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Deakin University478
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Que…456
Life Sciences
World #153 for connected research
87/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Mel…863
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University462
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Que…230
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Syd…178
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί UNSW Sydney162
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #511 for connected research
57/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University361
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Mel…355
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί RMIT University240
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Deakin University167
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Syd…151
Social Sciences
World #138 for connected research
88/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Mel…683
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University426
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Deakin University363
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Syd…271
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί RMIT University233
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 Monash UniversityDeakin UniversityThe University of
High yieldStandardLow yield

The University of Adelaide returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 7.0): a consortium waiting to happen. The University of Melbourne, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.5: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Melbourne3,286 3.5Low yield
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University2,587 3.4Low yield
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Deakin University1,100 3.2Low yield
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Sydney1,038 4.3Standard
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Queensland972 4.0Standard
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί UNSW Sydney874 4.3Standard
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί RMIT University645 4.3Standard
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Curtin University580 4.1Standard
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Griffith University493 5.8Standard
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Adelaide478 7.0Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 17,308
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 3,638
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 2,627
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 2,122
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 1,377
πŸ‡³πŸ‡Ώ New Zealand 788
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 747
πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡ͺ Sweden 719

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Melbourne 3,286
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University 2,587
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Deakin University 1,100
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Sydney 1,038
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Queensland 972
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί UNSW Sydney 874
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί RMIT University 645
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Curtin University 580

The network spans 78 countries and 1,107 universities, but the top two carry about 71% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Middle East white-space (0 of the region's 2 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.

πŸ‡­πŸ‡° 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 Decision Sciences.

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

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University United States · world top-17

Yale University is top-71 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Decision Sciences.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University United States · world top-28

Columbia University is top-59 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Decision Sciences.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

πŸ‡³πŸ‡± University of Amsterdam Netherlands · world top-29

University of Amsterdam is top-85 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Decision Sciences.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

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.

Royal Women's HospitalBox Hill HospitalAustin HospitalOlivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute
MedicineEngineeringBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyEnvironmental Science

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.

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ University of SaskatchewanCanada
πŸ‡ΏπŸ‡¦ University of PretoriaSouth Africa
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Carleton UniversityCanada
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· Γ‰cole Pratique des Hautes Γ‰tudesFrance
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of DelawareUnited States
Sports injuries and preventionLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

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 Middle East 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 The University of Adelaide tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the impact gap and the physical sciences & engineering 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 La Trobe 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 rivals.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, 22 July 2026 to be included at the 1 September launch.

Claim your fact file →

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 rivals.

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 rivals with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 172,000 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

172,000
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 1 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.