Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Indonesia (ID), 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 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
47,447
co-authored works, 5 years
931
partner universities
79
partner countries
561
sustained deep ties
1.13
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
  • Dentistry is the standout field. Ranked #244 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #364, Business, Management & Accounting #403 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on diversity and sustained. University of Indonesia sits in the 80th percentile for diversity and the 51st 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
  • International 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 #299 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (ID and United Kingdom) carry about 62% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win University of Cambridge. World top-6. University of Cambridge is top-35 globally in Social Sciences. Route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action.
  • 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.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Malaya returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.6). 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.

262
h-index of the joint research base
1.4M
citations to co-authored work
1.13
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
47,447
co-authored works, 2021-2025
37
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.

Influence30th pctReach50th pctDiversity80th pctSustained51st pctImpact7th pctInternational4th pctBrokerage91st pct

University of Indonesia is strongest on diversity (80th percentile), sustained (51st) and reach (50th). 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 International (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.

InflSustReacDiveEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight30th pct+6.6
Impact18% weight7th pct+1.3
Sustained18% weight51st pct+9.2
Reach16% weight50th pct+8.0
Diversity16% weight80th pct+12.8
International10% weight4th pct+0.4

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#1000Dentistry244Nursing364Business, Management &โ€ฆ403Psychology413Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ436Economics, Econometricโ€ฆ443
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Indonesia's strongest connected fields are Dentistry #244, Nursing #364, Business, Management & Accounting #403. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #299 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 #60 for connected research
95/100
Top collaboration partners
Airlangga University463
Padjadjaran University346
Universitas Gadjah Maโ€ฆ345
Universitas Sumatera โ€ฆ260
Hasanuddin University238
Life Sciences
World #299 for connected research
75/100
Top collaboration partners
IPB University128
Airlangga University109
Universitas Gadjah Maโ€ฆ72
Hasanuddin University72
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford66
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #231 for connected research
81/100
Top collaboration partners
Bandung Institute of โ€ฆ266
IPB University166
Universitas Gadjah Maโ€ฆ112
Binus University111
Padjadjaran University79
Social Sciences
World #8 for connected research
99/100
Top collaboration partners
Universitas Gadjah Maโ€ฆ189
Padjadjaran University140
Binus University138
Airlangga University138
Indonesia University โ€ฆ111
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 yieldAirlangga UniversiUniversitas GadjahIPB UniversityMahidol University
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Malaya returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Airlangga University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
Airlangga University697 1.8Low yield
Universitas Gadjah Mada687 1.7Low yield
Padjadjaran University575 1.8Low yield
IPB University465 1.3Low yield
Universitas Sumatera Utara421 1.4Low yield
Hasanuddin University406 1.8Low yield
Bandung Institute of Technology381 1.5Low yield
University of Brawijaya353 1.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford336 4.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ Mahidol University319 4.4Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

ID 7,097
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 1,704
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,366
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 1,069
MY 985
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 817
๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ Thailand 627
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Netherlands 615

Anchor partner institutions

Airlangga University 697
Universitas Gadjah Mada 687
Padjadjaran University 575
IPB University 465
Universitas Sumatera Utara 421
Hasanuddin University 406
Bandung Institute of Technology 381
University of Brawijaya 353

The network spans 79 countries and 931 universities, but the top two carry about 62% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the North America white-space (4 of the region's 62 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‡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‡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 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 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

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.

Oxford University Clinical Research Unit Indonesia
MedicineSocial SciencesHealth Professions

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‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Science BangaloreIndia
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Baylor UniversityUnited States
National Tsing Hua UniversityTW
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Beijing Forestry UniversityChina
Tabriz University of Medical SciencesIR
Public Health and NutritionSMEs Development and Digital MarketingIslamic Finance and CommunicationLegal Studies and PoliciesHealthcare Quality and SatisfactionIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies

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 University of Cambridge and a North America 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 Malaya tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international 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 Indonesia.

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.