Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Oregon (United States), 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 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
9,937
co-authored works, 5 years
896
partner universities
71
partner countries
512
sustained deep ties
3.65
collaboration impact (FWCI)
84%
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
  • Earth & Planetary Sciences is the standout field. Ranked #235 in the world for connected research, with Psychology #274, Social Sciences #295 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. University of Oregon sits in the 94th percentile for impact and the 56th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 130 of 156 partners (84%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 34th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,048 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 United Kingdom) carry about 80% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win Monash University. World top-7. Monash University is top-52 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Harvard University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 9.8). 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.

821
h-index of the joint research base
7.3M
citations to co-authored work
3.65
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
9,937
co-authored works, 2021-2025
55
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.

Influence42nd pctReach43rd pctDiversity34th pctSustained43rd pctImpact94th pctInternational56th pctBrokerage6th pct

University of Oregon is strongest on impact (94th percentile), international (56th) and sustained (43rd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 130 of 156 partners (84%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (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 pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight42nd pct+9.2
Impact18% weight94th pct+16.9
Sustained18% weight43rd pct+7.7
Reach16% weight43rd pct+6.9
Diversity16% weight34th pct+5.4
International10% weight56th pct+5.6

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#1000Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ235Psychology274Social Sciences295Mathematics325Neuroscience353Environmental Sci.384
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Oregon's strongest connected fields are Earth & Planetary Sciences #235, Psychology #274, Social Sciences #295. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #1,048 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 #1048 for connected research
12/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Oregon Health & Scienโ€ฆ95
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University51
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University46
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah45
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ43
Life Sciences
World #945 for connected research
21/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ58
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ58
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University57
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University50
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Oregon Health & Scienโ€ฆ48
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #994 for connected research
17/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ412
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University380
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The University of Texโ€ฆ363
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan357
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Arizona346
Social Sciences
World #660 for connected research
45/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University85
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State Unโ€ฆ82
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University81
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Michigan State Univerโ€ฆ71
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ69
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 WashHarvard UniversityOregon Health & Sc
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harvard University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 9.8): a consortium waiting to happen. Oregon Health & Science University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington230 5.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University221 9.8High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Oregon State University193 3.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University178 8.4High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Oregon Health & Science University165 2.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University159 5.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University148 7.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Berkeley148 7.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Davis139 6.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah137 5.4Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 8,974
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 910
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 526
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 499
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 479
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 417
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 399
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Switzerland 198

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington 230
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 221
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Oregon State University 193
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University 178
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Oregon Health & Science University 165
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University 159
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University 148
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Berkeley 148

The network spans 71 countries and 896 universities, but the top two carry about 80% 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.

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-115 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‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-52 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 King's College London United Kingdom · world top-10

King's College London is top-48 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‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland Australia · world top-12

The University of Queensland is top-99 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.

Physics and AstronomyPsychologyEarth and Planetary 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‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Ningbo UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Institut Polytechnique de BordeauxFrance
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Agricultural UniversityChina
Taif UniversitySA
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Leibniz University HannoverGermany
Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchGeological and Geochemical Analysis

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 NUS 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 Harvard University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the health & medicine 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 Oregon.

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.