Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Akron (United States), ranked in the global index.  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—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
3,643
co-authored works, 5 years
608
partner universities
55
partner countries
177
sustained deep ties
3.18
collaboration impact (FWCI)
90%
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
  • Economics, Econometrics & Finance is the standout field. Ranked #497 in the world for connected research, with Business, Management & Accounting #549, Chemical Engineering #666 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. University of Akron sits in the 81st percentile for impact and the 38th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 110 of 122 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 4th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,191 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 States and China) carry about 83% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-11 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Waikato returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 12.6). 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.

372
h-index of the joint research base
2.0M
citations to co-authored work
3.18
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
3,643
co-authored works, 2021-2025
45
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.

Influence5th pctReach7th pctDiversity4th pctSustained4th pctImpact81st pctInternational38th pctBrokerage52nd pct

University of Akron is strongest on impact (81st percentile), international (38th) and reach (7th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 110 of 122 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (4th 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.

ImpaInteEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight5th pct+1.1
Impact18% weight81st pct+14.6
Sustained18% weight4th pct+0.7
Reach16% weight7th pct+1.1
Diversity16% weight4th pct+0.6
International10% weight38th pct+3.8

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#1000Economics, Econometricโ€ฆ497Business, Management &โ€ฆ549Chemical Engineering666Materials Science725Chemistry800Decision Sciences878
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Akron's strongest connected fields are Economics, Econometrics & Finance #497, Business, Management & Accounting #549, Chemical Engineering #666. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #1,191 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 #1169 for connected research
2/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Kent State University19
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Northeastern Universiโ€ฆ15
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University13
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan12
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The Ohio State Univerโ€ฆ11
Life Sciences
World #1191 for connected research
0/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State Unโ€ฆ9
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve โ€ฆ9
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University7
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Ghent University7
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ6
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1051 for connected research
12/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ San Diego State Univeโ€ฆ65
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ South China Universitโ€ฆ46
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of โ€ฆ32
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Kent State University32
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Tennessโ€ฆ31
Social Sciences
World #1027 for connected research
14/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ University of Waikato35
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช Dublin City University28
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Kent State University25
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tianjin University21
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nankai University20
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 yieldKent State UniversSan Diego State UnCase Western ReserDublin City Univer
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Waikato returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 12.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Kent State University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Kent State University69 1.9Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ San Diego State University66 2.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University42 4.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ South China University of Technology41 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ University of Waikato36 12.6High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Tennessee at Knoxville34 2.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Zhejiang University of Technology30 8.5High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The University of Texas at Austin30 2.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve University29 1.1Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช Dublin City University29 16.9High yield
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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,460
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 462
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 94
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 72
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 70
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 66
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 45
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ New Zealand 44

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Kent State University 69
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ San Diego State University 66
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University 42
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ South China University of Technology 41
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ University of Waikato 36
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Tennessee at Knoxville 34
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Zhejiang University of Technology 30
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The University of Texas at Austin 30

The network spans 55 countries and 608 universities, but the top two carry about 83% 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 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-11 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‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-13 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‡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: 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.

Akron Children's HospitalCleveland Clinic Akron General
Materials ScienceChemistryChemical Engineering

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‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kumamoto UniversityJapan
Kaohsiung Medical UniversityTW
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท Ajou UniversitySouth Korea
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Yanshan UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Aligarh Muslim UniversityIndia
Polymer crystallization and propertiesPolymer Nanocomposites and PropertiesAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterizationbiodegradable polymer synthesis and propertiesRheology and Fluid Dynamics StudiesSynthesis and properties of polymers

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 CUHK 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 University of Waikato tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity 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 University of Akron.

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.