Researcher Evaluation Rules and Guidelines

Objectives of performance evaluation (“atestace“)

The evaluation of researchers:

  • contributes to improving the Institute’s research performance
  • provides input for the personnel policy
  • helps to compare the performance of researchers of the same qualification level
  • stimulates the continuous professional development of researchers
  • provides regular feedback to researchers on their performance

Evaluation rules

The evaluation of researchers is conducted:

  • at regular intervals, at least once every 5 years
  • outside the regular intervals, at the request from the Institute Director
  • outside the regular intervals, at the request of the researcher

The Institute Director will announce the evaluation methodology in advance to allow the evaluated employees to familiarize themselves with the evaluation criteria and prepare the required documents. Researchers are evaluated by the Evaluation Committee (“Atestační komise“), which serves as an advisory body of the Institute Director. The Evaluation Committee consists of at least 5 members, of whom at least 1/3 are external members. The committee and its chairman are appointed by the Institute Director after discussion in the Institute Board. The expertise of the Evaluation Committee members must cover the research focus of the whole Institute. The Evaluation Committee usually meets once a year to discuss evaluation proposals submitted outside the regular intervals.

The evaluation is carried out in the presence of the immediate superior of the evaluated employee (typically the Laboratory head). The immediate superior provides their evaluation together with career advice to the evaluated employee in the form of recommendations. The evaluated employee may request to be present at the proceedings. The evaluation criteria include scientific, professional and teaching activities; specifically, three major scientific achievements from the past 5 years (typically publications in journals with an impact factor), the preparation of proposals and participation in research grants, teaching and supervising PhD candidates, contract research, patents and inventions. During the evaluation the committee takes into account the employee’s other activities such as scientific awards, mobility, international collaboration, science promotion and leadership/management functions. The Evaluation Committee proceeds as follows:

  1. The committee should verify that the evaluated researcher has been informed of the evaluation criteria.
  2. The evaluated researcher must submit to the committee a completed evaluation form with relevant documentation of their activities since the last evaluation.
  3. The committee shall request the expert opinion from the immediate superior of the evaluated researcher. The superior may propose a change of qualification grade and employment contract terms.

Who is evaluated

The following employee grades appointed to research departments are evaluated:

  • V3 – Postdoctoral Fellow
  • V4 – Associated Scientist
  • V5 – Scientist
  • V6 – Senior Scientist

Research Assistants (V1) are not subject to evaluation, however, they can apply for promotion to grade “V2 – Graduate Student”  when they start their PhD studies. Graduate students (V2) are evaluated by the Committee for Doctoral Studies (see “Training and Supervision” below).

Evaluation report

The Evaluation Committee will:

  1. Determine the employee performance rating on the scale A – above average, B – average and C – below average.
  2. Recommend to the Institute Director to promote, maintain or demote the employee grade.
  3. Propose a change of the employment contract terms (permanent/fixed-term contract).
  4. If the evaluated employee is found to lack the required qualification according to Article 23 of the Annex to the Statutes of the Czech Academy of Sciences, the Evaluation Committee shall propose to the Institute Director to request the employee in writing to address the performance issues and shall propose the date for the next evaluation by which the issues must be addressed by the employee. If the issues are not addressed at the next evaluation the committee will propose to the Institute Director termination of employment.

The Institute Director shall decide on the evaluation result and appoint the employee grade on the basis of the Evaluation Committee proposal. The evaluated employee will be informed of the conclusions and will have the opportunity to comment on them. If there is no agreement between the opinions of the Evaluation Committee and the evaluated employee, the evaluated employee may request a review of the evaluation through a public review procedure (Article 23 of Appendix B of the Statutes of the Czech Academy of Sciences).

Reflection of CoARA Principles in the Institute Evaluation Strategy

As part of the commitment of the Czech Academy of Sciences to the principles of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA), outlined in its CoARA Action Plan 2024–2027, the Institute has updated its 2021–2026 Evaluation Methodology to reflect the key CoARA principles. Read more on the Reflection of CoARA Principles in the Institute Evaluation Strategy page.

Back to Human Resource Strategy for Researchers Home

HR Award logo