Abstract

The rise of managerial logics in research policy and universities in many countries over the past decades, has met with concerns and criticisms about dysfunctional effects of research evaluation and indicator regimes. Recently, concerted trans-national and national reform efforts have emerged seeking collective action to redress this complex, multi-level issue. For some actors in science systems, however, research assessment reform threatens the common good. In this study, I describe and theorize the contours of public debates in the Netherlands, over its national initiative for research assessment reform, Recognition and Rewards. Formally launched in 2019 to coordinate system-wide changes in assessment practices across the Dutch science system, the initiative has so far proved effective in uniting support from multiple influential national stakeholders. Simultaneously, though, it has provoked criticisms and animated debates, with concerns raised over the Netherlands ‘going it alone’ in pursuing reforms. This study makes two original contributions. The first is conceptual: drawing on a _collective action frames_ perspective, I analyze a large corpus of publicly available documents and statements and provide a framework for navigating how the case for collective action on assessment reform is constructed and contested. The second contribution is to call for expanding the agenda of science studies, where existing literature remains centered on critiquing performance indicators and the excellence regime. I argue a new research focus is urgently needed, focusing on the emerging realities, value conflicts, and ambiguities catalyzed by research assessment reform movements.