Your partner is evaluated against criteria set by their own institution and national system. If your collaboration produces nothing that counts towards those criteria, it is costing them time they cannot afford — and they will probably not say so.
What tends to be evaluated
- Publications, often with weight given to specific indexed categories.
- Teaching load and student outcomes.
- Successfully completed funded projects.
- Supervision of postgraduate students to completion.
- Formal academic titles awarded through national-level review.
Why this shapes what you propose
- A middle-author position may count for little in their system.
- Papers in venues their system does not recognise may not count at all.
- Supervising a student to completion may matter more than an extra paper.
- Ask directly what counts for them; the answer often reshapes the plan.
Titles and ranks
- Formal academic titles are conferred through a national process, distinct from job position.
- Requirements typically include publication record, supervision and teaching.
- The process is periodic, so timing matters to candidates.
- Supporting a partner's case can be a substantial contribution.
Practical implications for projects
- Ensure the partner leads outputs that count in their system.
- Involve their students in ways that advance completion.
- Support their funded-project record, not only your own.
- Provide documentation they can use in evaluation dossiers.
What you can offer that costs little
- A clear letter describing their intellectual role.
- Co-supervision arrangements formalised in writing.
- Invitations to give seminars and join panels.
- These are cheap for you and materially useful for them.
One thing worth remembering
Ask your partner directly: what counts towards your evaluation?
It takes one question and it frequently changes the shape of the project — which papers get written, who leads them, and which students are involved. Designing the collaboration without that information means designing it entirely around your own incentives.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
What are Vietnamese academics typically evaluated on?
Publications with weight to specific indexed categories, teaching load and student outcomes, successfully completed funded projects, supervision to completion, and formal titles awarded through national review.
Why does this shape what you propose?
Because a middle-author position may count for little, papers in unrecognised venues may not count at all, and supervising a student to completion may matter more than an extra paper.
How do academic titles work?
Formal titles are conferred through a national process distinct from job position, typically requiring publication record, supervision and teaching, and the process is periodic so timing matters.
What are the practical implications for projects?
Ensure the partner leads outputs that count in their system, involve their students in ways that advance completion, support their funded-project record, and provide documentation for evaluation dossiers.
What single question should you ask?
What counts towards your evaluation — it takes one question and frequently changes which papers get written, who leads them, and which students are involved.
