Should top universities be led by top researchers and are they?

Abstract

PurposeThis paper seeks to address the question: should the world's top universities be led by top researchers, and are they?Design/methodology/approachThe lifetime citations are counted by hand of the leaders of the world's top 100 universities identified in a global university ranking. These numbers are then normalised by adjusting for the different citation conventions across academic disciplines. Two statistical measures are used – Pearson's correlation coefficient and Spearman's ρ.FindingsThis study documents a positive correlation between the lifetime citations of a university's president and the position of that university in the global ranking. Better universities are run by better researchers. The results are not driven by outliers. That the top universities in the world – who have the widest choice of candidates – systematically appoint top researchers as their vice chancellors and presidents seems important to understand. This paper also shows that the pattern of presidents' life‐time citations follows a version of Lotka's power law.Originality/valueThere are two main areas of contribution. First, this paper attempts to use bibliometric data to address a performance‐related question of a type not seen before (to the author's knowledge). Second, despite the importance of research to research universities – as described in many mission‐statements – no studies currently exist that ask whether it matters if the head of a research university is himself or herself a committed researcher. Given the importance of universities in the world, and the difficulty that many have in appointing leaders, this question seems pertinent.