KEY POINTS:
There are accusations of strategic number fiddling in the leather-bound world of academia.
The latest round of the university research rankings showed yesterday that the University of Auckland had slipped to second from the top spot in 2003.
Vice-chancellor Stuart McCutcheon said Auckland had a third of the country's "A" ranked - or "world class" - researchers, more than any other institution.
It was hard to know why the university slipped a place but it seemed other tertiary education providers had reduced the eligibility of the lowly ranked "R" - or "research inactive" - staff.
"Any system is open to management. I think some people have taken the view that this is all about increasing the number of top researchers that you have in the institution," said Professor McCutcheon.
"Others have taken the view that reducing the number of people who aren't research active is also an appropriate way of increasing the average quality score."
Auckland was awarded $69.9 million or 30 per cent of the Performance-Based Research Fund's resources this year - making up about 10 per cent of its operating budget.
The University of Otago took the top honours in the Tertiary Education Commission's research rankings, rising from fourth.
The commission noted that the number of eligible staff at Otago dropped 8.3 per cent from 1357 in 2003 to 1244 last year but, adjusted to a full-time equivalent basis, the drop was a "less dramatic" 2.6 per cent.
A significant number of staff no longer eligible were assigned "R" in the earlier audit. However, eligibility guidelines had changed in the interim and the staff could have left their jobs or had a change in their employment agreements.
Otago vice-chancellor David Skegg said there was nothing untoward in the figures.
The numbers showed the actual fluctuation in staff and reflected the university's drive to reduce the number of part-time teachers and have more done by active researchers.
Staff eligibility was heavily audited by the commission.
"Last year, a Government report concluded that Otago is New Zealand's most research-intensive university," Professor Skegg said.
"It is gratifying that a rigorous assessment has now shown that our research is also of the highest quality."
Commission chief executive Janice Shiner said the research fund was still in its infancy but the early signs were pleasing.
It linked funding more closely to the quality of research than the old system based on student numbers.
Ms Shiner said the 41 per cent increase in the number of "A" ranked researchers to 628 people was an example of the fund's positive impact on tertiary education-based research.
The scheme also linked with forthcoming tertiary education changes. The University of Canterbury was ranked third, followed by Victoria University, the University of Waikato, Massey University and Lincoln University.
The Auckland University of Technology was the lowest ranked of the eight but improved its research quality score the most - by 141.6 per cent.
AUT vice-chancellor Derek McCormack said the rate of improvement was higher than forecast.
Massey University vice-chancellor Judith Kinnear said comparing institutions was less rigorous than comparing their performance in specific subject areas. This was due to the huge differences in the types of courses run by different tertiary organisations.
