5 MEASUREMENT OF R&D PERSONNEL

5.3. Measurement and data collection

5.3.1. Introduction

325. The measurement of personnel employed on R&D involves three exercises:

–Measuring their number in headcounts.

–Measuring their R&D activities in full-time equivalence (person-years).

–Measuring their characteristics.

5.3.2. Headcount data

Reasons for the approach

326.Data on the total number of persons who are mainly or partially employed on R&D allow links to be made with other data series, for example education or employment data or the results of population censuses. This is particularly important when examining the role of R&D employment in total stocks and flows of scientific and technical personnel.

327.Headcount data are also the most appropriate measure for collecting additional information about R&D personnel, such as age, gender or national origin. Such data are needed to conduct analytical studies and implement recruitment or other S&T policies aimed at reducing gender imbalances, shortages of personnel or the effects of ageing, “brain drain”, etc. There is an increasing demand from S&T policy makers for such data.

328.The OECD Manual on the Measurement of Human Resources devoted to S&T

– Canberra Manual (OECD/Eurostat, 1995) presents a set of guidelines aimed at measuring the stocks and flows of scientific and technical manpower. Researchers and technicians represent an important subset of human resources devoted to S&T (HRST), and experience has shown that R&D surveys are the most appropriate instrument for collecting headcount data. Population censuses, labour force surveys or population registers are useful complementary data sources but cannot be used systematically to obtain R&D personnel data.

Possible approaches and options

329.Various options are available for reporting headcount numbers:

–Number of persons engaged in R&D at a given date (e.g. end of period).

–Average number of persons engaged in R&D during the (calendar) year.

–Total number of persons engaged in R&D during the (calendar) year.

330. Insofar as possible, the approach adopted for measuring headcount data for R&D personnel should be similar to that used for collecting other statistical headcount series (employment, education) with which the R&D series are likely to be compared.

5 MEASUREMENT OF R&D PERSONNEL

5.3.3. Full-time equivalence (FTE) data

Reasons for the approach

331.While data series measuring the number of R&D staff, and notably researchers, have many important uses, they are not a substitute for a series based on the number of full-time equivalent staff. The latter is a true measure of the volume of R&D and must be maintained by all member countries for international comparisons.

332.R&D may be the primary function of some persons (e.g. workers in an R&D laboratory) or it may be a secondary function (e.g. members of a design and testing establishment). It may also be a significant part-time activity (e.g. university teachers or postgraduate students). To count only persons whose primary function is R&D would result in an underestimate of the effort devoted to R&D; to do a headcount of everyone spending some time on R&D would lead to an overestimate. The number of persons engaged in R&D must, therefore, also be expressed in full-time equivalents on R&D activities.

Measurement in person-years

333.One FTE may be thought of as one person-year. Thus, a person who normally spends 30% of his/her time on R&D and the rest on other activities (such as teaching, university administration and student counselling) should be considered as 0.3 FTE. Similarly, if a full-time R&D worker is employed at an R&D unit for only six months, this results in an FTE of 0.5. Since the normal working day (period) may differ from sector to sector and even from institution to institution, it is not meaningful to express FTE in person-hours.

334.Personnel should be measured as the number of person-years on R&D over the same period as the expenditure series.

FTE on a fixed date

335. In some cases, it may be more practical to survey the FTE of R&D personnel as of a specific date. If, however, there are significant seasonal variations in R&D employment (e.g. temporary staff hired by governments at the end of the university teaching year), allowance should be made for these variations in order to allow for comparison with data based on FTE during a period. Where the fixed-date approach is used and data are collected annually for the first or last day of the expenditure period, it is recommended that two-year moving averages should be used for comparisons with R&D expenditure data.

5 MEASUREMENT OF R&D PERSONNEL

Diversity of methods and the need for disclosure of method used

336.A number of restrictions apply to the actual measurement of FTE. It is therefore impossible to avoid differences in the methodology used for different countries and sectors. The most precise method, which is applied in the higher education sector, involves carrying out time-use surveys for each individual researcher. However, more approximate methods are often used in practice. One method often used consists of counting the number of positions for each category of personnel, then multiplying by appropriate R&D coefficients. In some cases, the R&D coefficients used are founded on survey data of some sort, while in others they are simply based on assumptions made by those who compile the statistics.

337.To improve international comparability regardless of the measurement methods used, the details of the methods employed should be made public. In particular, when R&D coefficients are used, information such as the value of coefficients, how they were obtained and how they are used in FTE calculations should be reported with the data, notably when reporting to international bodies (see Chapter 7, Section 7.6).

Specific problems in the higher education sector

338.The method used to measure R&D personnel should cover all categories of personnel defined as directly contributing to R&D activities in the sector, i.e. those actively involved in R&D and those supporting it.

339.To obtain appropriate data on R&D personnel in the higher education sector, it may be necessary to carry out time-use surveys or studies. Such surveys can be a source of valuable data even if they are only carried out once every five or ten years. Annex 2 gives more details regarding time-use surveys.

340.There are two interrelated problems for measurement of R&D personnel:

–Definition of the working time.

–Calculation of full-time equivalence.

•Definition of working time

341.The one aspect of an academic teacher’s/researcher’s workload that is usually well-defined (although not necessarily internationally comparable) is the number of his/her teaching hours in the academic year. Absolute working time varies according to a number of factors, such as:

–Number of teaching hours per week.

–Demands made by examinations and student supervision on teachers’ time.

–Administrative duties, which vary according to the time of year.

5 MEASUREMENT OF R&D PERSONNEL

–Nature of R&D activities and deadlines imposed for publication and/or presentation of results.

–Student vacation periods.

342.The working pattern of the staff therefore is very flexible, as time-use studies have shown. It has been found that much of their professional activity

– notably R&D – is carried out outside “normal working hours” and frequently outside the higher education institution itself.

•Calculation of full-time equivalence

343.Much attention has been devoted to defining “normal” working time, particularly since respondents in time-use surveys frequently report much longer working time than most similar categories of civil servants. Calculation of full-time equivalent R&D personnel must be based on total working time. Accordingly, no one person can represent more than one FTE in any year and hence cannot perform more than one FTE on R&D.

344.In practice, however, it may not always be possible to respect this principle. Some researchers, for example, may have activities in several R&D units. This is increasingly the case of academics who also work for enterprises. In such cases, for each individual, it may be possible to reduce the FTE to one.

345.In carrying out surveys, the definition of R&D and of what it includes, i.e. “normal time” and “overtime”, are very important if the respondent is to report his/her volume of R&D accurately. The method used for the time-use survey will have a bearing on the accuracy of FTE calculations (see Annex 2). If the survey is based on the distribution of working hours during a specific week, it is relatively easy to take into account R&D done outside “normal office hours”. If the respondent must evaluate the time spent on R&D during the whole year, it is more difficult to give correct weight to R&D (as well as to other work-related activities) done outside “normal” hours. Also, the time of year at which a time-use survey is carried out may have a bearing on the calculation of the full-time equivalence.