014. 'Universities must allocate structural resources to foster academic culture' – an interview with Sarah de Rijcke, rector of Leiden University

Long before “Erkennen & Waarderen” became a program, Prof. Dr. Sarah de Rijcke raised questions in her academic research about the functioning of academic assessment dynamics. In late 2025, De Rijcke took office as rector of Leiden University. As an administrator, how does she envision the future of the program?

One of the recurring themes in Sarah de Rijcke’s academic career is research on measurement methods for responsible and ethical research. In essence, the question is: how do you assess quality?

‘To put it simply, that’s what the Recognize & Rewards program is all about: quality. How can we make the quality we need—and that already exists—within the university more visible, and how can we better recognize and reward it?'
Upon joining the Leiden Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) in 2011, she focused on the impact of indicators, approaching the subject as broadly as possible. “Not to be able to claim that everything is wrong, but to illustrate what happens to researchers’ work when you evaluate it using indicators. In the latter case, you see a tunnel forming, which leaves a great deal of the world that you could also investigate untouched. That is, of course, a great pity. It touches on the very core of what you can investigate at a university. For me, that problem is a major motivation for working on this program.’

When you talk about quality, do you also mean the value of the sciences? That sounds a lot more philosophical than the technical discussions about systemic issues that dominate the conversation when it comes to Recognition & Rewards.

'That’s right. You need that technical aspect to get processes—and some people—moving. But it’s really also about the question: what is your purpose as a knowledge institution? Why did you actually start working there as an individual? In a broad sense, this applies to researchers, faculty, and support staff alike. These are people who want to contribute to the public sector, who have become passionate about a subject, or who want to educate students.
We don’t yet fully see that drive reflected in the way we assess and measure quality. Fortunately, that is starting to change. I think that as a leader, you have to ensure that the technical and value-driven discussions are given equal weight. The aspect of cultural change and how we talk about it together is, I believe, an ongoing process.’

How do you translate that abstract idea of passion for academia into practical recognition and reward?

‘For me, it’s a lens through which you view a wide range of topics. Not just promotion, but also who you work with, how you ensure job satisfaction in the broadest sense, and how we work together to make it attractive to move in and out of the university. That we encourage that flexibility rather than labeling it a failure. I think it’s very important to continue emphasizing the vitality of careers in a system that’s so focused on moving up.

I find the new policy on PhD degrees that we have developed at the LUMC to be a great example. We recently introduced the PhD Thesis Framework, a structure for supervising and evaluating the various scientific activities carried out by a PhD candidate. The Framework was very effectively designed from the ground up, with administrative support and scientific expertise in the field of Open Science. It also stands out because it comes from a biomedical field, where administrative support is not a given due to international competition. But even in those circles, you’re now seeing things start to move, which I think is wonderful.’

What is your turning point when it comes to thinking about recognition and rewards?

‘That was even before I started working at the CWTS. I earned my PhD in 2010 in Groningen under Douwe Draaisma and Trudy Dehue, who wrote academic books for a broad audience in Dutch that were later translated into many languages. Those books were sometimes labeled as popular science and therefore didn’t automatically count toward research assessments. That’s when I realized: this is quite a peculiar situation. You have a wide reach and a great deal of influence with your work, you set the tone of a debate—in other words, you’re doing truly meaningful work—but because of the national and international evaluation culture, your contributions aren’t properly visible within your own faculty and don’t count. In practice at the faculty, there was some appreciation, but it took a lot of juggling to make that happen. That surprised me at the time, and later I made it my own mission. Trudy Dehue was constantly grappling with the question of how she could put this on the agenda as an issue. We already didn't have that classic distinction between innovation and outreach activities back then.

For the program, my turning point is that after a few years, you see it gaining broader support. We’re truly past the phase of “having to convince the masses.” Now the tone is: “We have to get it done, where are the results, come on, let’s get moving!” (laughs)

This is a long-term programme, with changes that aren’t always immediately clear to researchers themselves. Where should researchers look for guidance in practice?

‘It is clear to the system that you cannot bring about a change within a few years in a culture that has been built up over decades. That excellence policy is really twenty-five, thirty years old. But that is not much use to you if you are on a PhD programme that only lasts a few years.

I think it’s the role of the senior people in the system to keep explaining the long-term perspective, to look after the whole team, and to give them the opportunity to develop broadly wherever possible. I think this can be done effectively, without jeopardising careers, precisely because you operate in teams and can discuss how to tackle things together in such a way that your own contribution is doubled. If you think and operate at team level, you can develop much more as an individual. You can also meet certain requirements that are needed in the short term. That does require a certain level of leadership, and it places demands on our senior staff in management positions.’

‘On the other hand, I also understand perfectly well that people are thinking, “When will I actually see any results?” Nevertheless, clear, measurable steps have been taken: here in Leiden, all seven faculties are developing new career policies. The policy on professorships is also set to be revised, and we have ius promovendi for senior lecturers and associate professors. And, of course, the PhD Framework I mentioned earlier.
The things you can’t really measure properly are the daily conversations people have with one another. How do we equip people to talk to one another about what they’re doing? That sounds incredibly basic, but sometimes it really is that simple. There are always situations where people haven’t spoken to each other for a while and, in an annual review, fall back on old patterns that provide a sense of security. Then, complex questions about opportunities and limits for a career aren’t discussed.’

Some Dutch universities have developed conversation cards for this purpose.

‘I think that’s a lovely idea, and I have some myself. Still, I sometimes wonder: do people actually use those kinds of cards in their day-to-day work? I don’t know.’

The Recognition & Rewards programme will be formally concluded by the end of 2026. What is your hope for the future, which is fast approaching?

‘My wish is that we will devote much more attention to teams and how they deal with academic culture. There are some excellent examples of this, in the UK for instance. And that we get a firm grasp on the positive narrative of the culture we want to see. That capacity is built up in this area. That R&R is not just a programme but a normal part of a university organisation.’

In other words, you think we need to step it up a notch?

‘Yes, there are currently many people working on Recognition & Appreciation on a temporary funding basis. Ideally, we’d want there to be permanent capacity to work on academic culture. Where we are now is only the beginning. We have a number of very good examples of practical implementation, but these are mainly among academic staff. We’ve barely got round to support staff yet. And I think the relationship between the questions ‘where do you want to go as an organisation’ and ‘how do you support that’ should be a fundamental part of university policy-making.’

What if that doesn't happens?

‘If that doesn't happens… I can't even imagine it, we simply have to do it. This is an international movement, and the Netherlands still plays a small pioneering role in it. I'd say hold on to that.’

Text: @claartjechajes, translation: Deepl