Brno University of Technology

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Brno University of Technology (BUT) presents a complex integrity profile, with an overall score of 0.615 reflecting a combination of notable strengths and specific, high-priority areas for improvement. The institution demonstrates commendable resilience in critical areas such as the Rate of Retracted Output, Hyper-Authored Output, and maintaining a low gap between its overall impact and that of its internally-led research, indicating robust quality control and genuine scientific leadership. These strengths provide a solid foundation for its academic mission. However, this is contrasted by significant risks, most notably an exceptionally high Rate of Output in Institutional Journals, and medium-level risks in Institutional Self-Citation, Multiple Affiliations, and publication in Discontinued Journals. These challenges suggest a tendency towards academic endogamy and a need for a more rigorous external publication strategy. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, BUT's performance aligns with its technical orientation, excelling as a national leader in areas such as Business, Management and Accounting (1st), Energy (2nd), Mathematics (2nd), and Computer Science (3rd). While these thematic strengths are clear, the identified integrity risks, particularly those related to insular publication practices, could undermine the university's mission to provide "high-quality" research with broad impact and foster "co-operation with the industry." An over-reliance on internal validation may limit the global reach and external validation essential for true excellence and industrial partnership. By strategically addressing these vulnerabilities, particularly in its dissemination policies, BUT can better protect its reputation and ensure its scientific contributions achieve the external recognition they deserve, fully aligning its practices with its stated mission of excellence.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of 0.380 is higher than the national average of 0.229, placing it in a position of high exposure within a shared medium-risk environment. This indicates that while the national context shows some signs of this activity, the university is more prone to this specific risk than its peers. While multiple affiliations can be a legitimate outcome of collaboration, a disproportionately high rate can signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or “affiliation shopping.” This heightened exposure suggests a need to review affiliation policies to ensure they reflect genuine collaborative contributions and do not create a perception of artificially boosting institutional metrics.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.118, the institution demonstrates a very low rate of retractions, contrasting sharply with the Czech Republic's moderate-risk average of 0.034. This positive differential highlights the university's institutional resilience, suggesting that its internal control mechanisms are effectively mitigating the systemic risks present in the broader national environment. This low score is a sign of responsible supervision and robust pre-publication quality control, indicating that potential issues are likely identified and corrected before they can lead to retractions, thereby safeguarding the integrity of its scientific output.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university's Z-score for this indicator is 0.775, which is significantly higher than the national average of 0.386. Although both operate within a medium-risk context, the institution shows a much higher exposure to this risk. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but this elevated rate warns of potential scientific isolation or 'echo chambers' where research is validated internally without sufficient external scrutiny. This dynamic creates a risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence may be disproportionately shaped by internal dynamics rather than by recognition from the global scientific community.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution presents a Z-score of 0.358, indicating a moderate risk level that deviates from the low-risk national standard (Z-score of -0.153). This suggests the university is more sensitive to this risk factor than its national peers. Publishing in journals that are later discontinued is a critical alert regarding the due diligence applied in selecting dissemination channels. This score indicates that a portion of the university's research is being channeled through media that may not meet international quality standards, exposing the institution to reputational risks and highlighting a need for improved information literacy among researchers to avoid low-quality publication practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution's Z-score of -0.757 is firmly in the low-risk category, demonstrating strong institutional resilience when compared to the country's moderate-risk average of 0.375. This result indicates that the university's authorship practices are well-controlled and likely align with established disciplinary norms. By effectively managing this aspect, the institution successfully avoids the risks of author list inflation and the dilution of individual accountability, ensuring that credit is assigned transparently and appropriately, a positive signal for its research culture.

Gap between Impact of total output and the impact of output with leadership

With a Z-score of -0.660, the institution shows a healthy, low-risk profile in this area, showcasing its resilience against the moderate-risk trend seen at the national level (Z-score of 0.862). A low gap indicates that the university's scientific prestige is not overly dependent on external partners but is driven by strong internal capacity and intellectual leadership. This result is a key indicator of sustainable research excellence, demonstrating that the institution's impact is structural and generated from its own core research activities.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -0.070, while in the low-risk category, is slightly higher than the national average of -0.401. This subtle difference points to an incipient vulnerability that warrants monitoring. Although the risk is currently low for both, the university shows the first signals of activity in an otherwise more inert environment. It is important to ensure that cases of high productivity are legitimate and do not mask imbalances between quantity and quality, such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without meaningful intellectual contribution, which could compromise the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

This indicator represents a critical area of concern, with the institution's Z-score at a significant level of 5.518, far surpassing the country's moderate-risk score of 1.180. This situation points to a risk accentuation, where the university amplifies a vulnerability already present in the national system. An excessive dependence on in-house journals raises serious conflicts of interest, as the institution acts as both judge and party in the publication process. This practice risks fostering academic endogamy, where research may bypass independent external peer review, thereby limiting its global visibility and potentially being used as a 'fast track' to inflate publication metrics without standard competitive validation.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of 0.560 places it at a moderate risk level, a notable deviation from the low-risk national profile (Z-score of -0.059). This suggests the university is more sensitive to practices associated with redundant publication. A high value in this indicator alerts to the potential for 'salami slicing,' where a single coherent study is fragmented into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity. This practice not only distorts the scientific evidence base but also overburdens the peer-review system, prioritizing publication volume over the generation of significant new knowledge.