Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Utah State University (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.

◇ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
13,719
co-authored works, 5 years
936
partner universities
76
partner countries
566
sustained deep ties
2.46
collaboration impact (FWCI)
86%
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
  • Environmental Science is the standout field. Ranked #254 in the world for connected research, with Agricultural & Biological Sciences #276, Earth & Planetary Sciences #356 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on diversity and sustained. Utah State University sits in the 57th percentile for diversity and the 51st for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 103 of 120 partners (86%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 38th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,008 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 78% 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • 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.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Arizona returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 6.9). 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.

520
h-index of the joint research base
3.0M
citations to co-authored work
2.46
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
13,719
co-authored works, 2021-2025
43
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.

Influence38th pctReach51st pctDiversity57th pctSustained51st pctImpact46th pctInternational41st pctBrokerage16th pct

Utah State University is strongest on diversity (57th percentile), sustained (51st) and reach (51st). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 103 of 120 partners (86%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (38th 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% weight38th pct+8.4
Impact18% weight46th pct+8.3
Sustained18% weight51st pct+9.2
Reach16% weight51st pct+8.2
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight41st pct+4.1

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#1000Environmental Sci.254Agricultural & Biologi…276Earth & Planetary Scie…356Arts & Humanities551Social Sciences560Decision Sciences587
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Utah State University's strongest connected fields are Environmental Science #254, Agricultural & Biological Sciences #276, Earth & Planetary Sciences #356. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #1,008 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 #1008 for connected research
16/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Utah59
🇺🇸 Michigan State Univer…32
🇺🇸 Brigham Young Univers…25
🇺🇸 University of Wiscons…23
🇺🇸 University of Pennsyl…21
Life Sciences
World #693 for connected research
42/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Washington State Univ…61
🇺🇸 University of Utah53
🇺🇸 The Ohio State Univer…49
🇺🇸 Pennsylvania State Un…48
🇺🇸 University of Idaho48
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #755 for connected research
37/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Utah140
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…138
🇺🇸 Colorado State Univer…135
🇺🇸 University of Califor…116
🇺🇸 University of Arizona110
Social Sciences
World #584 for connected research
51/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Colorado State Univer…88
🇺🇸 University of Utah72
🇺🇸 Pennsylvania State Un…71
🇺🇸 Brigham Young Univers…66
🇺🇸 Michigan State Univer…55
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 UtahUniversity of VermNational Tsing HuaUniversity of Ariz
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Arizona returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 6.9): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Utah, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.3: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇺🇸 University of Utah336 2.3Low yield
🇺🇸 University of Vermont336 0.7Low yield
🇧🇷 Universidade Federal de Viçosa296 0.0Low yield
National Tsing Hua University293 0.0Low yield
🇺🇸 Michigan State University189 3.7Standard
🇺🇸 University of California, Davis183 3.7Standard
🇺🇸 Pennsylvania State University174 4.1Standard
🇺🇸 Brigham Young University165 2.1Low yield
🇺🇸 Colorado State University164 5.4Standard
🇺🇸 University of Arizona150 6.9High 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

🇺🇸 United States 9,153
🇨🇳 China 826
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 636
🇧🇷 Brazil 540
🇨🇦 Canada 505
🇫🇷 France 377
TW 369
🇩🇪 Germany 321

Anchor partner institutions

🇺🇸 University of Utah 336
🇺🇸 University of Vermont 336
🇧🇷 Universidade Federal de Viçosa 296
National Tsing Hua University 293
🇺🇸 Michigan State University 189
🇺🇸 University of California, Davis 183
🇺🇸 Pennsylvania State University 174
🇺🇸 Brigham Young University 165

The network spans 76 countries and 936 universities, but the top two carry about 78% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (10 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.

🇭🇰 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

🇸🇬 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

🇭🇰 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

🇬🇧 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

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.

Arctic Long Term Ecological ResearchUtah State University Space Dynamics LaboratoryUtah Agricultural Experiment Station
Agricultural and Biological SciencesEnvironmental SciencePhysics and Astronomy

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.

🇨🇳 Jiangnan UniversityChina
🇦🇹 TU WienAustria
🇺🇸 Florida CollegeUnited States
🇫🇷 Université de ToursFrance
🇨🇳 Southwest UniversityChina
Plant and animal studiesEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesRangeland and Wildlife ManagementIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsWildlife Ecology and ConservationPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics

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 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 Arizona 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 Utah State 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 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.