Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Silesia in Katowice (Poland), 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.

◇ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Europe · 417 universities benchmarked
14,131
co-authored works, 5 years
829
partner universities
69
partner countries
376
sustained deep ties
1.37
collaboration impact (FWCI)
91%
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
  • Chemistry is the standout field. Ranked #507 in the world for connected research, with Dentistry #511, Chemical Engineering #542 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on reach and diversity. University of Silesia in Katowice sits in the 31st percentile for reach and the 28th for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 83 of 91 partners (91%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 8th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #790 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Poland and United States) carry about 62% 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: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Warsaw returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 3.0). 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.

246
h-index of the joint research base
1.0M
citations to co-authored work
1.37
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
14,131
co-authored works, 2021-2025
25
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.

Influence8th pctReach31st pctDiversity28th pctSustained23rd pctImpact11th pctInternational21st pctBrokerage57th pct

University of Silesia in Katowice is strongest on reach (31st percentile), diversity (28th) and sustained (23rd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 83 of 91 partners (91%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (8th 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 global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight8th pct+1.8
Impact18% weight11th pct+2.0
Sustained18% weight23rd pct+4.1
Reach16% weight31st pct+5.0
Diversity16% weight28th pct+4.5
International10% weight21st pct+2.1

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#1000Chemistry507Dentistry511Chemical Engineering542Earth & Planetary Scie…543Materials Science632Agricultural & Biologi…681
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Silesia in Katowice's strongest connected fields are Chemistry #507, Dentistry #511, Chemical Engineering #542. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #790 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 #790 for connected research
34/100
Top collaboration partners
🇵🇱 Medical University of…105
🇵🇱 Jagiellonian Universi…100
🇵🇱 Medical University of…94
🇵🇱 Silesian University o…75
🇵🇱 Poznan University of …74
Life Sciences
World #563 for connected research
53/100
Top collaboration partners
🇵🇱 Jagiellonian Universi…97
🇵🇱 Silesian University o…53
🇵🇱 University of Gdańsk42
🇵🇱 Adam Mickiewicz Unive…34
🇵🇱 University of Wrocław28
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #773 for connected research
35/100
Top collaboration partners
🇵🇱 Silesian University o…325
🇵🇱 AGH University of Kra…312
🇵🇱 Jagiellonian Universi…258
🇵🇱 University of Warsaw182
🇵🇱 University of Wrocław128
Social Sciences
World #276 for connected research
77/100
Top collaboration partners
🇵🇱 Jagiellonian Universi…75
🇵🇱 University of Warsaw54
🇵🇱 University of Wrocław52
🇵🇱 Adam Mickiewicz Unive…46
🇦🇹 University of Vienna36
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 yieldJagiellonian UniveSilesian UniversitUniversity of WarsUniversity of Tart
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Warsaw returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.0): a consortium waiting to happen. Jagiellonian University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇵🇱 Jagiellonian University447 1.8Low yield
🇵🇱 Silesian University of Technology419 1.4Low yield
🇵🇱 AGH University of Krakow321 1.7Low yield
🇵🇱 Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań219 1.8Low yield
King Saud University217 1.6Low yield
🇵🇱 University of Warsaw214 3.0Standard
🇵🇱 University of Wrocław186 2.1Low yield
University of Tartu174 0.9Low yield
🇵🇱 Medical University of Warsaw131 1.2Low yield
🇵🇱 Nicolaus Copernicus University123 1.6Low 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

🇵🇱 Poland 2,833
🇺🇸 United States 728
🇩🇪 Germany 397
🇨🇳 China 395
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 392
🇫🇷 France 351
🇮🇹 Italy 330
SA 274

Anchor partner institutions

🇵🇱 Jagiellonian University 447
🇵🇱 Silesian University of Technology 419
🇵🇱 AGH University of Krakow 321
🇵🇱 Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań 219
King Saud University 217
🇵🇱 University of Warsaw 214
🇵🇱 University of Wrocław 186
University of Tartu 174

The network spans 69 countries and 829 universities, but the top two carry about 62% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Asia-Pacific white-space (1 of the region's 34 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.

🇭🇰 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 your strongest field.

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

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

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

🇦🇺 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: 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.

Social SciencesMaterials ScienceAgricultural and Biological 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.

🇮🇳 Panjab UniversityIndia
🇧🇷 Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de JaneiroBrazil
🇯🇵 Yokohama City UniversityJapan
🇺🇸 Oakland UniversityUnited States
🇺🇸 San Jose State UniversityUnited States
Language and CultureEducation and Cultural StudiesPolish Historical and Cultural StudiesCentral European Literary StudiesFerroelectric and Piezoelectric MaterialsBotany and Plant Ecology 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 HKU and a Asia-Pacific 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 Warsaw tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence 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 Silesia in Katowice.

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.