Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Loughborough University (United Kingdom), 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 Europe · 417 universities benchmarked
26,792
co-authored works, 5 years
1,058
partner universities
78
partner countries
732
sustained deep ties
3.05
collaboration impact (FWCI)
89%
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
  • Strong on impact and reach. Loughborough University sits in the 76th percentile for impact and the 72nd for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 110 of 123 partners (89%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 56th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #912 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (United Kingdom and United States) carry about 71% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win Stanford University. World top-11. Stanford University is top-63 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win University of California San Diego. World top-18. University of California San Diego is top-252 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Liverpool returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 7.6). 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.

502
h-index of the joint research base
3.7M
citations to co-authored work
3.05
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
26,792
co-authored works, 2021-2025
68
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.

Influence56th pctReach72nd pctDiversity71st pctSustained69th pctImpact76th pctInternational72nd pctBrokerage42nd pct

Loughborough University is strongest on impact (76th percentile), reach (72nd) and international (72nd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 110 of 123 partners (89%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (56th 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% weight56th pct+12.3
Impact18% weight76th pct+13.7
Sustained18% weight69th pct+12.4
Reach16% weight72nd pct+11.5
Diversity16% weight71st pct+11.4
International10% weight72nd pct+7.2

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.

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 #651 for connected research
46/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Leicestโ€ฆ2,216
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง UCL426
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Imperial College Londโ€ฆ368
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Nottingโ€ฆ365
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford313
Life Sciences
World #912 for connected research
24/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Nottingโ€ฆ209
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Leicestโ€ฆ201
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridโ€ฆ62
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง UCL60
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford57
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #514 for connected research
57/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Imperial College Londโ€ฆ574
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford383
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง UCL362
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridโ€ฆ311
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช KTH Royal Institute oโ€ฆ241
Social Sciences
World #410 for connected research
66/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Imperial College Londโ€ฆ420
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง UCL307
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridโ€ฆ255
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช University College Coโ€ฆ218
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช KTH Royal Institute oโ€ฆ217
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 yieldUniversity of LeicUniversity of NottUniversity of ShefUniversity of Glas
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Liverpool returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 7.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Nottingham Trent University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Leicester2,545 4.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Nottingham882 3.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London646 4.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Imperial College London600 5.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford467 5.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Birmingham381 4.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridge337 5.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Edinburgh320 5.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง King's College London314 5.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Manchester280 5.2Standard
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‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 12,238
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 2,373
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 2,199
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 1,132
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 841
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 633
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 612
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Netherlands 607

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Leicester 2,545
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Nottingham 882
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London 646
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Imperial College London 600
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford 467
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Birmingham 381
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridge 337
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Edinburgh 320

The network spans 78 countries and 1,058 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 5

The research funding behind the network

โ‚ฌ25M85 projects
Horizon EuropeHorizon 2020

€25M across 85 funded projects from the European Commission, split €4M Horizon Europe and €21M Horizon 2020, every project traceable to the funder's own record (CORDIS). The fact file adds the ERC and the major national funders, each named and linked, never a single black-box platform.

Funding is shown next to the network because the two move together: the fundable opportunities below are chosen where a real programme already exists to pay for the bridge.

Source: funders' own award systems + CORDIS, awards active 2021–2025 · verified

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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University United States · world top-11

Stanford University is top-63 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

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

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California San Diego United States · world top-18

University of California San Diego is top-252 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

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

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of British Columbia Canada · world top-19

University of British Columbia is top-66 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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Duke University United States · world top-22

Duke University is top-140 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

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

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.

NIHR Leicester-Loughborough Diet, Lifestyle and Physical Activity Biomedical Research UnitLoughborough HospitalNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre
MedicineSocial Sciences

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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of OklahomaUnited States
National Taiwan UniversityTW
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of StrathclydeUnited Kingdom
๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Universidad de SevillaSpain
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Hawaiสปi at MฤnoaUnited States
Sports Performance and TrainingSport and Mega-Event ImpactsSports, Gender, and SocietyObesity, Physical Activity, DietSports injuries and preventionPhysical Activity and Health

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 Stanford University 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 University of Liverpool 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 Loughborough 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.