USP currently has a policy to reward staff publishing papers in highly ranked journals with a cash bonus in their salaries. The incentive scheme is based upon a formula of $5,000 for an A* publication, $3,000 for an A publication and $500 for a B publication, pro-rata for the number of authors on each publication. Research books, book chapters and patents have also been rewarded under the scheme through an equivalence arrangement.
It has been argued that the scheme has been successful to date, since the number of high ranked publications authored by University staff has been steadily increasing (see Fig. 1 below).
[table id=3 /]
Fig 1: USP registered the highest number of publications in 2018, with 239 internationally recognized publications indexed by Scopus (see Fig. 1). This has surpassed the previous record of 218 set in 2017. As at 10 June 2019, there are 95 new publications for the year 2019. The estimate for 2019 is 250.
However, the scheme has also been criticised on a number of grounds:
For these reasons SMT has agreed the following revisions to the Research Excellence Publication Incentive scheme.
The elements of the new scheme will be as follows:
All USP staff members identified as authors on a research publication will be eligible to receive rewards pro rata (Appendix A provides guidance on the requirements of a research publication). Contributing authors will be expected to identify their contribution to the publication and in all cases contributions must be significant. For example, having merely supervised a student’s thesis will not be sufficient for the purposes of these awards. (Please see Appendix B for more detailed guidance on authorship requirements).
USP adopts the Definition of Research & Experimental Development by the Australian Government’s Department of Education & Training, as outlined in the 2019 Higher Education Research Data Collection (HERDC).
The HERDC definition of research and experimental development, abbreviated as R&D, is consistent with the OECD definition of research and experimental development set out in the 2015 Frascati Manual. R&D is defined as:
‘creative and systematic work undertaken in order to increase the stock of knowledge – including knowledge of humankind, culture and society – and to devise new applications of available knowledge.’
For an activity to be an R&D activity it must satisfy all five core criteria:
The above definition encompasses pure and oriented basic research, applied research and experimental development, defined as follows:
Activities that meet the above definition of R&D include:
Activities that do not meet the definition of R&D include:
Authorship confers credit and has important academic, social, and financial implications. Authorship also implies responsibility and accountability for published work. The following recommendations are intended to ensure that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to a paper are given credit as authors, but also that contributors credited as authors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published.
Because authorship does not communicate what contributions qualified an individual to be an author, some journals now request and publish information about the contributions of each person named as having participated in a submitted study, at least for original research. Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and implement a contributorship policy. Such policies remove much of the ambiguity surrounding contributions, but leave unresolved the question of the quantity and quality of contribution that qualify an individual for authorship. The ICMJE has thus developed criteria for authorship that can be used by all journals, including those that distinguish authors from other contributors.
Authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:
In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged—see Section II.A.3 below. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.
The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. We encourage collaboration and co-authorship with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.
The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and gathering conflict of interest forms and statements, are properly completed, although these duties may be delegated to one or more coauthors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, the ICMJE recommends that editors send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.
When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete conflict-of-interest disclosure forms.
Some large multi-author groups designate authorship by a group name, with or without the names of individuals. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should specify the group name if one exists, and clearly identify the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as authors. The byline of the article identifies who is directly responsible for the manuscript, and MEDLINE lists as authors whichever names appear on the byline. If the byline includes a group name, MEDLINE will list the names of individual group members who are authors or who are collaborators, sometimes called non-author contributors, if there is a note associated with the byline clearly stating that the individual names are elsewhere in the paper and whether those names are authors or collaborators.
Contributors who meet fewer than all 4 of the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but they should be acknowledged. Examples of activities that alone (without other contributions) do not qualify a contributor for authorship are acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading. Those whose contributions do not justify authorship may be acknowledged individually or together as a group under a single heading (e.g. “Clinical Investigators” or “Participating Investigators”), and their contributions should be specified (e.g., “served as scientific advisors,” “critically reviewed the study proposal,” “collected data,” “provided and cared for study patients”, “participated in writing or technical editing of the manuscript”).
Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged individuals of a study’s data and conclusions, editors are advised to require that the corresponding author obtain written permission to be acknowledged from all acknowledged individuals.
 OECD (2015), Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The 46-48.Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, OECD Publishing, Paris, pp 44-45.
 Ibid. pp
 Higher degree by research (HDR) training is training undertaken by students to achieve a Research Doctorate or Research Masters. A Research Doctorate means a Level 10 Doctoral Degree (Research) qualification as described in the Australian Qualifications Framework Professional Doctorates may be included but only where at least two-thirds of the qualification is research.and a Research Masters means a Level 9 Masters Degree (Research) qualification as described in the Australian Qualifications Framework.
 2019 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors; http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html