To whom it may concern:

10 AVENUES LEADING TO SHANGHAI TOP 500 (ALSO, THE-QS and WEBOMETRICS)
AND 10 ISSUES OF CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE (5 issues, each one 2 sub-issues)

Introductory Notes (10):

a. This is a study that I have completed at the request of Prof. Lekovic,
Vice Rector of the University of Belgrade, in charge of the National Top500 project.
It gives only the basic points (details are obtainable on special request).
The first version was created in May 2009.

b. To complete this study, several experts were consulted;
primarily, Prof. Demsar (Ljubljana), Prof. Neuhold (Wienna), Prof. Valero (Barcelona), and Prof. Mester (Szeged).

c. Different universities are taking different avenues leading to the Shanghai Top 500 list,
and these avenues are defined next.

d. The best approach is to take all of them concurrently, for synergistic reasons.
Examples of benefits coming from synergistic interraction of the 10 avenues are obtainable on request.

e. What I list below are the avenues, and for each avenue I specify a university which got significant points
by taking that avenue. For each university I can supply the name of my contact,
who represents direct link to the major driver along the speciied avenue
(Rector, Director of National Science Foundation, etc.).

f. Each issue defined below has a price tag, both to create and to maintain.
The price of each one can be calculated on request.

g. Each issue has a social dimension, and without appropriate attention given to the social dimension,
the success can be jeopardized.

h. Each issue needs a responsible person or institution, to take a permanent care about,
plus a mechanism with elements of: bible, stick and carrot.

i. Benefits of getting onto the Top500 list are multifold,
and their elaboration is a subject of a follow-up write-up.

j. IMPORTANT NOTE: Issues do not count for Shanghai500, but act as crucial accelerators of the process.
Avenues do count for the list. Avenues bring Shanghai points, and issues help the avenues to bring more points.

Issues of Importance:

a. DIRECT VISIBILITY

No matter what are the results generated by faculty members,
the major issue is that all their results are clearly visible. One does not apply to the Shanghai list.
They use the Internet services to find data themselves (primarily from the Nobel Prize portals and the SCI portals),
and that means that many results do not get noticed.
My uneducated guess is that only 20% of the results generated by the U. of Belgrade get noticed,
for a number of reasons:
(a) UofBGD name is not visible on papers from affiliated institutions, or
(b) It is visible in results that are not recorded.

Therefore, the crucial issue is that each university has a portal,
in which the data are sorted using the SAME structure as is the structure of the Shanghai evaluation criteria,
so they find ALL at one place, EASILY.
That portal should be the first Google hit, when the official name of the university is typed,
no matter what language is used (English, Serbian, Chinese, Spanish).
The Szeged Univerity has a respectable portal, using 1:1 correspondance with what Shanghai looks for
(I do not know if that is so by accident, or due to a systemaqtic effort).

This portal will not be the primary source of information for ranking lists;
it will be of secondary value for ranking lists, but it is still very necessary.
Also, it will serve as an important motivation mechanism for SRB scientists,
if each and every one can see there how many points he/she brought to its university
on each and every relevant ranking list.

The portal must include not only the data of interest for Shanghai,
but also the data of interest for the other two lists getting popular
(one in UK, THE-QS, and one in SPAIN, WEBOMETRICS).

a1. Important for Shanghai:

Nobels (NL) or Major Field Medalists (MFMs) among alumni (10%).
A question here is if HDs count?
There is some indication that these may count,
but with an order of magnitude lower weight.
That has yet to be proved.
In any way, it does not hurt us to list them
at the portal, in the HD category.
We have about 10 NLs and MFMs among currect and future
HDs (Honorary Doctors).
It is quite possible that some Serbs from Diaspora,
alumni of Belgrade, received an MFM.
Their list has to be collected,
after it is precisely determined,
what are the MFMs that Shanghai accepts for ranking.
Also, leading researchers of SRB should be nominated
for MFMs that Shanghai accepts.

Nobels (NL) or Major Field Medalists (MFMs) among staff (20%).
All NLs and MFMs who got our HDs, did express an interest
to teach courses for credit in SRB,
via Internet or to come here.
What counts is not where the "radna knjizica" resides,
but where the courses for credit are taught.
Consequently, each school/department of UB (31),
and each schol/department of any other SRB university
has to create a TOPICS-IN course,
which brings transferable Bologna credits,
and can be taught only by NL of MFM
(the list of MFMs that Shanghai accepts,
can be found via the Shanghai portal).

Peak Researchers (20%).
This is where both,
the number of SCI papers and SCI citations count,
as well as the fellow nominations.
SRB has to create a list of researchers
with SCI citations count over 50,
with SCI papers count over 50,
and the list of fellows (nonMFMmedalists)
of major societies and companies
(Fellows of the IEEE, ACM, Intel, IBM,
MS, Oracle, Cisco, Google,..).
Tesla and Pupin were Fellows of IRE (now IEEE),
and could count,
had their nominations in BG been not dropped
at the time they were alive.

For the peak researchers to help all their lifetime,
all those who satisfy criteria for Shanghai points,
should never be asked to retire.

In Slovenia,
no university professor is ever aked to retire.
What I propose for SRB is less mersiful:
Only those who bring non-trivial Shanghai points
should never be asked to retire.
Consequenlty, the current EMERITUS LAW IN SRB
has to be changed, and linked to Shanghai criteria.
Currently it is linked to the 3% condition,
which creates ambiguities and room for abuse.
Of course, in order not to cut jobs for youngers,
the teaching of non-retired post-65 professors
should be limited only to master and PHD studies,
and only to one course per semester.
Opening of a third, summer semester
(in addition to fall and spring)
should be considered,
and not only for TOPICS-IN courses
(visitors can easily come in summers,
and summers are ideal make-up periods
for courses difficult to pass;
(at Purdue University,
all taugh courses are offered also in summers).

Size (10%).
Our major Achilies heal. Legislature is needed
that moves non-productive staff to teaching services,
which do not count (like financial services, cleaning
services, student services, housing services, ...).
All priviledges and titles should be kept intact,
to amortize frictons. A grace period should be given to
those who wish to improve. Full professors should be kept
intact, so they become alies, not enemies. Also,
productive groups should be incorporated (if the Jozef
Stefan Institute would become a part of LJ university,
LJ would get into Top100).

SCI (20%).
Both papers and citations are important.
However, here is the stress on SCI papers.
AGAIN, RETIRED PROFESSORS WITH HIGH CUMULATIVE SCI
SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO TEACH AND TO ADVICE PHD STUDENTS,
LIFELONG (LIKE AT ALL MAJOR USA UNIVERSITIES).

Also, government has to give money both for SCI papers
and SCI citations, but ONLY IF AND AFTER THE FACTS
BECOME VISIBLE BOTH ON THE NATIONAL BULLETIN BOARD
(that motivates others in the nation,
more than any money)
AND AN FP7 PROPOSAL INCLUDING THESE PAPERS AND CITATIONS
(SCI) GETS SUBMITTED (SEE BELOW),
BECAUSE SUCCESSFULL PROPOSALS BRING MONEY TO GOVERNMENT
IMMEDIATELY, and ALMOST-SUCCESSFUL ONES BRING MONEY (VERY
LIKELY) IN THE NEXT CALL (see below).

In other words, money is needed
for all these awards, and it can come from FP7. Actually,
if the work is relevant, money is more likely to come.
So,
the criterion for awards should be not only SCI (quality),
but SCI and FP7 (quality and relevance). Hybrid solutions
are also possible, i.e. small awards for SCI only,
and significant awards for SCI+FP7 (synergy).

Articles at Nature and Science (20%)
These should be awarded by Government and Press
(see part on MEDIA VISIBILITY given below).
Each such paper should be given nice money by government
and an article in Politika,
and an exposure at RTS.

The bottom line is that NSF of SRB should be giving money as follows:

1. "Na kasicicu"
To all registered researchers,
just to keep them above biological survival minumum.
Recimo, nacionalni minimalac.

2. "Lopatom"
Kad generisu SCI bodove za Shanghai (radove i citate).
Recimo, E100 za rad i E10 za citat.

3. "Bagerom"
Kad generisu rad za Nature and Science.
Recimo, E1000.

a2. Important for others (UK and ESP):

International students
They will come if appropriate infrastructure exists;
quality of education is not the only issue of importance.
ALSO, BRING STANFORD or MIT programs to BG,
and foreign students from the region will hog our doors!
STUDENTS COUNT NO MATTER WHAT COUNTRY THEY COME FROM!
International staff
Each faculty should have a 3-credit course TOPICS IN XYZ,
should be taught by a foreign professor
(they do not need high honoraria to come;
what is important to them is to spread their mission,
and what can also help is the LONELY PLANET #1 :)
FOREIGN PROFESSORS COUNT ONLY IF THEY COME FROM
SHANGHAI TOP 500 AND TEACH FOR CREDIT.
Students accepted for grad schools at other top universities
This is our major strength, since only ETF brings
on average 10 grad students per year to Top10 USA schools
(esspecially after a course has been generated which
teaches students how to get there - ETF got money
equivalent to $1M now, from a past student who became
an alumnus of Stanford, and the course was created to
maximize the probability that something like that
happens again; the course also includes FP7, MBA, and
SCI, plus parts on inventivity, creativity,
effectiveness, and efficiency). Also, 40 past students of
ETF are now doing PHD in Barcelona, which is treated the
EU top in computer design.
THIS COUNTS ONLY IF OUR STUDENTS REACH SHANGHAI 500.
Staff teaching at other top universities
All our professors visiting elsewhere have to be listed,
but only if "elsewhere" is Shanghai top 500.

The portal creation and maintenance have a non-trivial price tag, which can be calculated.
Prof. Jovanovic and RCUB, plus Prof. Popovic and ETF, should be consulted about the tender for the portal creation.

b. GOVERNMENT IMPOSED MOTIVATION MECHANISMS

In order to help generate good results, GOVERNMENT has to introduce motivation mechanisms,
both for national funding and for EU funding:

b1. For national funding, the best example is Slovenia
(Ljubljana is at the position 402).
SLO funding criteria are very close to Shanghai criteria.
A posible solution is to ask a VIP from Slovenia to help
generate such criteria for Serbia,
and to add both, the mechanisms that make the Serbia criteria
IDENTICAL to Shanghai criteria (ALL 6 listed above), and also the
PREVENTIVE mechanisms that prevent frictions from stepping on
toes of seniors who are influential, but week in science, and
could generate frictions (ako si redovni profesor, niko nece da
te dira, ali nemoj da kocis, nego pomogni - prikljuci se ideji
koja dobija; a ako si asistent, docent ili vanredni,
zapni iz sve snage). This means that issues like
papers in Nature and Science have to be financially recognized;
not only the SCI papers. This means mechanisms that get
introduced gradually, selectively, and transparently.
The core of the financial mechanism is presented above.

b2. For international funding, the best examples are Germany and
Austria, where very good but unsuccessfull proposals get
non-trivial reimburcements for preparation efforts.
Along the same lines,
Croatia has introduced a mechanism which cold for SRB, too:

Each FP7 proposal is rated with up to 15 points:
ST, Scientific and Technical, gets up to 5 points,
MF, Management and Finances, gets up to 5 points,
ED, European Dimension, gets up to 5 points.

If a proposal gets 12 points or more,
it has good chances to win an EU contract.
If a proposal gets 10 points or more,
but does not win a contract, it gets:
E10K for project leader, if from CRO
E4K for WP leader, if from CRO
E3K for each partner from CRO
All this on condition that none of the three parts is rated below
3 points (ovo ogranicenje je odlicno, da se ne bi desilo da se
neko uortacio sa firmom R&R koja garantuje 4.5. na ST i ED, pa
se 10 poena prebaci sa slabim ST delom od samo 1 poen).
Also, total given out is E10K (ako je iz CRO leader
i jos dva partnera, total koji se daje nije E16K, nego E10K,
ali to ogranicenje nije dobro).

Consequently, in 2008, CRO output to EU was E2M,
and the input from EU was E17M (based on what I have, SRB data
are E1M8 and E2M4). For CALL 5 (closed Oct 26, 2009), success
rate of Croatia is excellent; of SRB was tragic.
Please, note that ETF has a course
which teaches students how to do FP7 proposals.
This course is also available at PMF (obligatory at MasterFFH),
FON (elective at PHD level), and Singidunum (obligatory at PHD).

My proposal for SRB (which is what SLO may introduce soon):

E5K if PROJECT leader
E2K if WP leader
E1K if partner
Condition: min 3 at either ST, or MF, or ED.
Important: money in one week after application for money!

This money comes from the Minister of Finances, via the Minister
of Science, since each almost-successful project may win next
time, and then the government funds get loaded with orders of
magnitude more money that given for reimburcements (socijalno,
zdravtveno, penziono, etc). Primer: Ako SRB univerzitet, kao
jedan od partnera donese E350K za plate, od toga E150K ostaje
SRB drzavi (faktor oko 1.75), pa zato ima smisla da drzava
stimulise almost-successful proposals, jer se buduci uspesni
generisu upravo iz ove grupe. Sada drzava daje 10% uspesnima,
ali to nije neophodno, jer ako je neko dobio pare od EU,
on ima para, i ne treba dodatno opterecivati budzet (zasto
podmazivati rep debeloj guski?).

c. UNIVERSITY IMPOSED MOTIVATION MECHANISMS

In order to help generate good results, UNIVERSITIES have to introduce good motivation mechanisms for:

c1. PHD student publications
LJ is now asking 2 SCI papers for PHD.
c2. faculty promotions
LJ has made the promtion criteria much tougher than BG

Crucial principles to apply: PRIMENA SA ZADRSKOM, POSTEPENOST, SELEKTIVNOST, TRANSPARENTNOST, i RELEVANTNOST
(source: Franci Demsar, Director of the NSF of Slovenia). Razrada ovih 5 kriterijuma je predmet posebnog dopisa.

Suggestion for SRB, based on statistical analysis:

1. for natural and medical sciencies, 3 SCI papers for PHD.
2. for electrical and computer engineering, 2 SCI papers
3. for other engineering, 1 SCI paper
4. for social sciences (laws, economy, etc), 1 SSCI paper
5. for arts and humanities (languages, etc), 1 paper, in one of:
AHCI or ERIH A or ERIH B.
ERIH C NOT ACCEPTABLE.
GOOD DOMESTIC JOURNAL HAVE TO GET INTO ERICH A OR B.

A GUIDELINE ON HOW TO MAKE A JOURNAL FOR SCI, SSCI, AHCI, OR ERIH,
ON SPECIAL REQUEST.

It should be announced that the above rules will be applied in 5 years from now,
and will be made tigheter every 5 years.
Another possibility is that the rule for sciences/medicine be applied immediately,
for EE/CE in 2 years, for other engineering in 3 years, for SSCI in 4 years,
and for arts and humanities in 5 years.

Absolutely everything has to be transparent to the entire nation!

d. INDIRECT VISIBILITY

In order to generate visible results (that get easily publishable),
mentors have to be motivated to focus on the relevant problems, so that money, time, effort, and talent is not wasted.
So, mechanisms (offices) are needed to help:

d1. Effectivennes,
how to select the right road to reach the target destination
d2. Efficiency,
how to be fast on that road

One possible scenario (related to effectiveness) that wastes talent and time is the following one:
Assistents are typically recruited among the best students,
and very often end up doing PHD with the politically most influential professor in the Area (Katedra),
who is not productive (effective), so they are given a suva-drenovina topic for PHD.
How to prevent this?
National list of topic priorites and consultation of that list when the thesis topic is to be approved,
or even better, asking for a SCI paper at the time of thesis topic addoption.
It is good to require N SCI papers form mentors, but not life-time; instead, sliding-window of 10 years.

One possible scenario (related to efficiency) needing improvement
is that promotion committees waste their time on clear cases (promote vs reject),
which can be treated automatically. They shoud concentrate their time only on gray-zone cases (details on request).
Also, each promotion should be evaluated by an ethics committee (important topic not covered here).

This issue has a price tag, not only in money, but also in social issues,
and can be calculated with an appropriate effort.

BOTOTM LINE: MENTORS MUST SATISFY THE MINIMUM SCI PAPER REQUIREMENT.
AGAIN, THE RULE SHOULD BE APPLIED WITH DELAY, AND TRANSPARENTLY.

e. PRESS VISIBILITY

Researcher get better informed via media and newspapers, then via official channels. Consequently,

e1. Politika (and others) have to write about the issues
and mechanisms presented here.
e2. Rectors and ProRectors have to talk for TV,
as well.

The Mission Team must include reps from media!

* * * * *

Avenues:

1. NLs and MFMs among alumni. An excellent example: Stanford.
It is not that there is nothing that SRB can do here :)
My contacts: Flynn + Hennessy
(president of Stanford, my co-author on a recent book).

2. NLs and MFMs among staff. An excellent example: Texas.
My contact: Patt (MFM)
There are several sub-avenues that SRB can take :)
Non-resident staff does count on certain conditions.
OUR ALUMNI WHO ARE PROFESSORS ELSEWHERE, SHOULD BE ASKED TO TEACH!

SUGGESTION: ASK THE STUDENT ORGANIZATION
IF IT IS OK THAT AN MFM MAKES A 20 MINUTE LECTURE AT THE APRIL 4
CELEBRATION, AND THEN CONTINUES WITH A TOPICS-IN COURSE AT ETF!

3. Peak Researchers. Best example: Politechnic of Valencia.
The avenue boils down to hiring good researchers.
My contacts: Pont + Jil. Details on request.

4. Size. Best example: Milano.
The avenue boils down to moving weak researchers to teaching
services, which is easily doable at private universities,
and very difficult at state universities.
Detailes on request. My contact: Sami.

5. SCI. Not only papers, but citations, too, have to be clearly
visible at the portal. Best example: Ljubljana.
Details on request.

6. Articles in Science and Nature. Best example: Ljubljana
Contacts: Demsar and Tomazic. Details on request.

7. International Students, Best example: U. of Tokyo.
The avenue implies excellent infrastructure for foreign students
(instant nostrification of diplomas, mobilty, dorms, services).
My contact to rector: Prof. Fujii.

8. International Staff. Best example: Waseda.
Details on request. My contact to Rector: Prof. Iwai

9. Student acceptance rate at other univesities. Details on request.
Best example: Technion. My contact: Prof. Valero.

10. Staff teaching elsewhere. Details on request.
Best example: Weizman. My contact: Prof. David.

Final Notes (10):

a. Someone has to be responsible for generation of data for the portal.
b. Someone has to be responsible for the portal implementation.
c. Someone has to calculate the points from the BGD portal,
and to report to the Shanghai administration, if a difference
is noticed - a watchdog is needed (same as above).
d. Someone has to be responsible for implementation of all
motivation mechanisms in the Gov domain (Minister of Science).
e. Someone has to be responsible for implementation of motivation
mechanisms at SRB universites, both public and private (Rectors).
f. Someone has to be made responsible for national priorites
(effectiveness and efficiency).
g. Someone has to be responsible for MEDIA VISIBILITY
(suggestion: Stanko Stojiljkovic and Olivera Kosic).
Stanko bi bili zaduzeni za vizibilitet cele akcije!
h. Someone has to be made responsible for PUSH at universities
outside BGD (e.g. Filipovic KG, Milovanovic NI, NS, etc...)
i. Someone has to be responsible for PUSH at private universities.
Given the fact how little the government gives for public
universities, some of the private universities may overpass UB.
j. Someone has to be responsible for continuity
(universities come to Top500, and some of them stay there for only
one year - make sure that does not happen to us, once one successfull
administration term expires). A SELF ORGANIZING SYSTEM IS NEEDED!

FINAL COMMENTS:

1. Acording to Prof. Mester talk in Amalfi,
Shanghai analyses 3000 and reports 500.
If UB is among 3000, our job is easier.
If not, our job is tough.
Someone has to find out if UB is among 3000, and where?

2. According to Prof. Mester,
all top 500 universities have a strong central gevernance,
which makes it easy to introduce and reinforce wise rules.
If UB likes to become a memeber of the top 500 family,
the university statute has to be modified.

3. Puno se moze uticati i prilkom akreditacije univerziteta/fakultteta.

4. Treba javiti Shanghai-u koji su sve sinonimi/hononimi za University
of Belgrade.

5. Treba formirati Vece PHD studija, u kojem su samo profesori cije stvaralastvo donosi Shanghai bodove.
To je pristup suprotan formiranju Teaching Services (u prvom slucaju se izdizu dobri,
a u drugom slucaju se marginalizuju losi).

6. Treba angazovati telo koje ce formirati detaljne zahteve za Portal.

7. Treba imati u vidu da su, za Shanghai i ostale liste, primarni izvori informacija Nobelova Fondacija i SCI Lista,
a da su portali univerziteta sekundarni izvori, i kao takvi marginalni, ali da moraju da postoje.

8. Dakle, nije cilj portala da posluzi kao primarni izvor za svetske liste, vec su ciljevi sledeci:

a. Da posluzi kao sekundarni izvor
(koji ima multipe funkcije: recimo,
da se izbegne slucaj Osijeka ciji su bodovi razbacani
na 6 razlicitih institucija).
Interesantno je da Osiek ima dva nobelovca,
ali ne kao univerzitet, vec kao gimnazija.

b. Da sadrzi precizne informacije o tome koji
profesor/docent/asistent/student koliko donosi bodova
svom univerzitetu, za sve tri liste.

9. Postojane takvog portala pre svega pomaze da se stvori transparentnost u lokalnim uslovima,
odnosno motivacija da se radi i stvara (to nije jedina motivacija, nego jedna od).

10. NAJVAZNIJE: Da se pre formiranja portala osmisli sistem automatskog (za korisnike nevidljivog) unosenja podataka,
jer najgore je ako portal postoji, a nije azuriran (kao sto je sada slucaj sa portalom univerziteta,
barem u slucaju mojih radova koji su tamo izlistani,
jer ne postoji za mene neprimetan sistem unosa,
a svaki covek je po prirodi lenj za aktivnosti koje ne predstavljaju trivijalan napor).

Srecno! Moja se uloga ovde zavrsava!
___________________________________________________________________________

Prof. Dr. Veljko Milutinovic, Fellow of the IEEE
Department of Computer Engineering
School of Electrical Engineering
POB 35-54
11120 Belgrade
Serbia

sky: veljko.milutinovic (by appointment only)
web: http://kondor.etf.rs/~vm/
sms: +381.64.1389281 (cell)

-----------------------------------------------------