<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=2003%3AE5%3A272E%3AC1D%3A182E%3AE5%3A50C2%3A19B7</id>
	<title>EQIPD - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=2003%3AE5%3A272E%3AC1D%3A182E%3AE5%3A50C2%3A19B7"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7"/>
	<updated>2026-06-25T23:59:37Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.31.0</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=78</id>
		<title>1.1 Mission</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=78"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T13:28:06Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== ​​​​​​​​​​​​A. Background &amp;amp; Definitions ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the EQIPD Quality System&amp;#039;s [[Implementation Strategy]], the first thing that the [[1.5.2.3 Process owner]] does is to prepare an answer to the questions why she / he has decided to implement a Quality System.  It is expected that this question will be asked not only by the members of her / his research unit but also by other colleagues and collaborators. Thus, Process Owner should be prepared to have a convincing answer that justifies the efforts and time that will be invested in the implementation and maintenance of the Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EQIPD terms, mission statement is a concise summary of why quality matters for the research unit. Please visit the [[Main Page|EQIPD Framework]] page for information on how EQIPD defines quality and examples of how different types of scientists answer the question &amp;quot;why quality matters&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
EQIPD emphasizes not the length of the mission statement but its ability to be understood and followed by all members of the research unit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This Toolbox item refers to one of the [[Core Requirements]]  (Core Requirement 3 - &amp;quot;The research unit must have defined quality objectives​​&amp;quot;).​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== B. Guidance &amp;amp; Expectations ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The mission statement may have the following sections:​&lt;br /&gt;
General statement about research data quality&lt;br /&gt;
​List what quality means in your environment or context.&lt;br /&gt;
Prioritize where quality does matter the most.&lt;br /&gt;
​Define the goal of your research unit or parent organization with regard to research quality.&lt;br /&gt;
What is at stake when research quality is not maintained&lt;br /&gt;
​Analyze the consequences of non-compliance or inferior quality for your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Describe the biggest risks for non-compliance or inferior quality in your environment.&lt;br /&gt;
List specific measures to be taken to address these risks.&lt;br /&gt;
​Quality objectives&lt;br /&gt;
​Describe what exactly shall the Quality System improve in your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Define the specific, measurable and traceable goals that your research unit and/or parent organization wants to achieve with the EQIPD Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
Define indicators for each objective and describe how you will use them.&lt;br /&gt;
More information can be found here [[Mission statement supporting information]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;PLEASE DO NOT FORGET&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
​​To make sure that an incentive and award/reward structure is aligned with the quality objectives (please refer to items 1.3.1-1.3.4 for more information). The following questions serve as example of how such alignment can be tested:&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage / support publication of negative results?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we recognize / reward high-quality results irrespective of the outcome (positive/negative)?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people to develop and implement risk-mitigating strategies and procedures? Do we recognize these efforts?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people not to rush experiments but to invest time and resources in developing/using robust methods, optimizing experimental set-ups and to conduct experiments properly according to high-quality standards (even if it takes more time than initially allocated)?​&lt;br /&gt;
Do we review internal processes to make sure that there is no pressure to generate positive results? If there is such pressure, do we have processes to mitigate the risks?&lt;br /&gt;
When evaluating new job applications, do we pay attention to rigor of applicants’ research?​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== C. Resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Template to create a Mission Statement based on the above guidance - [https://paasp.sharepoint.com/sites/EQIPD/SiteAssets/EQIPD%20QS/Mission/1.1%20Mission.docx 1.1 Mission.docx]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experiences from the pilot phase of implementing research assessment reforms for hiring professors at BIH/Charité -  [https://sfdora.org/2019/10/20/rewarding-robust-and-reproducible-research-experiences-from-the-pilot-phase-of-implementing-research-assessment-reforms-for-hiring-professors-at-bih-charite-merit-prof/ MERIT-PROF]​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Financial incentives to support re-use of open data, preregister and to publish negative (null) results - [https://www.bihealth.org/en/research/quest-center/initiatives/ BIH QUEST examples​]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to [[Toolbox]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Next item: [[1.2 Scope]]​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=77</id>
		<title>1.1 Mission</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=77"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T13:27:45Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== ​​​​​​​​​​​​A. Background &amp;amp; Definitions ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the EQIPD Quality System&amp;#039;s [[Implementation Strategy]], the first thing that the [[1.5.2.3 Process owner]] does is to prepare an answer to the questions why she / he has decided to implement a Quality System.  It is expected that this question will be asked not only by the members of her / his research unit but also by other colleagues and collaborators. Thus, Process Owner should be prepared to have a convincing answer that justifies the efforts and time that will be invested in the implementation and maintenance of the Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EQIPD terms, mission statement is a concise summary of why quality matters for the research unit. Please visit the [[Main Page|EQIPD Framework]] page for information on how EQIPD defines quality and examples of how different types of scientists answer the question &amp;quot;why quality matters&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
EQIPD emphasizes not the length of the mission statement but its ability to be understood and followed by all members of the research unit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This Toolbox item refers to one of the [[Core Requirements]]  (Core Requirement 3 - &amp;quot;The research unit must have defined quality objectives​​&amp;quot;).​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== B. Guidance &amp;amp; Expectations ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The mission statement may have the following sections:​&lt;br /&gt;
General statement about research data quality&lt;br /&gt;
​List what quality means in your environment or context.&lt;br /&gt;
Prioritize where quality does matter the most.&lt;br /&gt;
​Define the goal of your research unit or parent organization with regard to research quality.&lt;br /&gt;
What is at stake when research quality is not maintained&lt;br /&gt;
​Analyze the consequences of non-compliance or inferior quality for your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Describe the biggest risks for non-compliance or inferior quality in your environment.&lt;br /&gt;
List specific measures to be taken to address these risks.&lt;br /&gt;
​Quality objectives&lt;br /&gt;
​Describe what exactly shall the Quality System improve in your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Define the specific, measurable and traceable goals that your research unit and/or parent organization wants to achieve with the EQIPD Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
Define indicators for each objective and describe how you will use them.&lt;br /&gt;
More information can be found here [[Mission statement supporting information]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;PLEASE DO NOT FORGET&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
​​To make sure that an incentive and award/reward structure is aligned with the quality objectives (please refer to items 1.3.1-1.3.4 for more information). The following questions serve as example of how such alignment can be tested:&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage / support publication of negative results?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we recognize / reward high-quality results irrespective of the outcome (positive/negative)?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people to develop and implement risk-mitigating strategies and procedures? Do we recognize these efforts?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people not to rush experiments but to invest time and resources in developing/using robust methods, optimizing experimental set-ups and to conduct experiments properly according to high-quality standards (even if it takes more time than initially allocated)?​&lt;br /&gt;
Do we review internal processes to make sure that there is no pressure to generate positive results? If there is such pressure, do we have processes to mitigate the risks?&lt;br /&gt;
When evaluating new job applications, do we pay attention to rigor of applicants’ research?​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== C. Resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Template to create a Mission Statement based on the above guidance - [https://paasp.sharepoint.com/sites/EQIPD/SiteAssets/EQIPD%20QS/Mission/1.1%20Mission.docx]1.1 Mission.docx&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experiences from the pilot phase of implementing research assessment reforms for hiring professors at BIH/Charité -  [https://sfdora.org/2019/10/20/rewarding-robust-and-reproducible-research-experiences-from-the-pilot-phase-of-implementing-research-assessment-reforms-for-hiring-professors-at-bih-charite-merit-prof/ MERIT-PROF]​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Financial incentives to support re-use of open data, preregister and to publish negative (null) results - [https://www.bihealth.org/en/research/quest-center/initiatives/ BIH QUEST examples​]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to [[Toolbox]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Next item: [[1.2 Scope]]​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=76</id>
		<title>1.1 Mission</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=76"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T13:24:10Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== ​​​​​​​​​​​​A. Background &amp;amp; Definitions ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the EQIPD Quality System&amp;#039;s [[Implementation Strategy]], the first thing that the [[1.5.2.3 Process owner]] does is to prepare an answer to the questions why she / he has decided to implement a Quality System.  It is expected that this question will be asked not only by the members of her / his research unit but also by other colleagues and collaborators. Thus, Process Owner should be prepared to have a convincing answer that justifies the efforts and time that will be invested in the implementation and maintenance of the Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EQIPD terms, mission statement is a concise summary of why quality matters for the research unit. Please visit the [[Main Page|EQIPD Framework]] page for information on how EQIPD defines quality and examples of how different types of scientists answer the question &amp;quot;why quality matters&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
EQIPD emphasizes not the length of the mission statement but its ability to be understood and followed by all members of the research unit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This Toolbox item refers to one of the [[Core Requirements]]  (Core Requirement 3 - &amp;quot;The research unit must have defined quality objectives​​&amp;quot;).​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== B. Guidance &amp;amp; Expectations ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The mission statement may have the following sections:​&lt;br /&gt;
General statement about research data quality&lt;br /&gt;
​List what quality means in your environment or context.&lt;br /&gt;
Prioritize where quality does matter the most.&lt;br /&gt;
​Define the goal of your research unit or parent organization with regard to research quality.&lt;br /&gt;
What is at stake when research quality is not maintained&lt;br /&gt;
​Analyze the consequences of non-compliance or inferior quality for your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Describe the biggest risks for non-compliance or inferior quality in your environment.&lt;br /&gt;
List specific measures to be taken to address these risks.&lt;br /&gt;
​Quality objectives&lt;br /&gt;
​Describe what exactly shall the Quality System improve in your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Define the specific, measurable and traceable goals that your research unit and/or parent organization wants to achieve with the EQIPD Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
Define indicators for each objective and describe how you will use them.&lt;br /&gt;
More information can be found here [[Mission statement supporting information]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;PLEASE DO NOT FORGET&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
​​To make sure that an incentive and award/reward structure is aligned with the quality objectives (please refer to items 1.3.1-1.3.4 for more information). The following questions serve as example of how such alignment can be tested:&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage / support publication of negative results?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we recognize / reward high-quality results irrespective of the outcome (positive/negative)?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people to develop and implement risk-mitigating strategies and procedures? Do we recognize these efforts?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people not to rush experiments but to invest time and resources in developing/using robust methods, optimizing experimental set-ups and to conduct experiments properly according to high-quality standards (even if it takes more time than initially allocated)?​&lt;br /&gt;
Do we review internal processes to make sure that there is no pressure to generate positive results? If there is such pressure, do we have processes to mitigate the risks?&lt;br /&gt;
When evaluating new job applications, do we pay attention to rigor of applicants’ research?​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== C. Resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Template to create a Mission Statement based on the above guidance - [https://paasp.sharepoint.com/sites/EQIPD/SiteAssets/EQIPD%20QS/Mission/1.1%20Mission.docx]1.1 Mission.docx&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experiences from the pilot phase of implementing research assessment reforms for hiring professors at BIH/Charité - MERIT-PROF [https://sfdora.org/2019/10/20/rewarding-robust-and-reproducible-research-experiences-from-the-pilot-phase-of-implementing-research-assessment-reforms-for-hiring-professors-at-bih-charite-merit-prof/]​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Financial incentives to support re-use of open data, preregister and to publish negative (null) results - BIH QUEST examples​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to [[Toolbox]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Next item: [[1.2 Scope]]​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=75</id>
		<title>1.1 Mission</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=75"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T13:23:34Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== ​​​​​​​​​​​​A. Background &amp;amp; Definitions ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the EQIPD Quality System&amp;#039;s [[Implementation Strategy]], the first thing that the [[1.5.2.3 Process owner]] does is to prepare an answer to the questions why she / he has decided to implement a Quality System.  It is expected that this question will be asked not only by the members of her / his research unit but also by other colleagues and collaborators. Thus, Process Owner should be prepared to have a convincing answer that justifies the efforts and time that will be invested in the implementation and maintenance of the Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EQIPD terms, mission statement is a concise summary of why quality matters for the research unit. Please visit the [[Main Page|EQIPD Framework]] page for information on how EQIPD defines quality and examples of how different types of scientists answer the question &amp;quot;why quality matters&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
EQIPD emphasizes not the length of the mission statement but its ability to be understood and followed by all members of the research unit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This Toolbox item refers to one of the [[Core Requirements]]  (Core Requirement 3 - &amp;quot;The research unit must have defined quality objectives​​&amp;quot;).​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== B. Guidance &amp;amp; Expectations ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The mission statement may have the following sections:​&lt;br /&gt;
General statement about research data quality&lt;br /&gt;
​List what quality means in your environment or context.&lt;br /&gt;
Prioritize where quality does matter the most.&lt;br /&gt;
​Define the goal of your research unit or parent organization with regard to research quality.&lt;br /&gt;
What is at stake when research quality is not maintained&lt;br /&gt;
​Analyze the consequences of non-compliance or inferior quality for your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Describe the biggest risks for non-compliance or inferior quality in your environment.&lt;br /&gt;
List specific measures to be taken to address these risks.&lt;br /&gt;
​Quality objectives&lt;br /&gt;
​Describe what exactly shall the Quality System improve in your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Define the specific, measurable and traceable goals that your research unit and/or parent organization wants to achieve with the EQIPD Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
Define indicators for each objective and describe how you will use them.&lt;br /&gt;
More information can be found here [[Mission statement supporting information]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;PLEASE DO NOT FORGET&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
​​To make sure that an incentive and award/reward structure is aligned with the quality objectives (please refer to items 1.3.1-1.3.4 for more information). The following questions serve as example of how such alignment can be tested:&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage / support publication of negative results?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we recognize / reward high-quality results irrespective of the outcome (positive/negative)?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people to develop and implement risk-mitigating strategies and procedures? Do we recognize these efforts?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people not to rush experiments but to invest time and resources in developing/using robust methods, optimizing experimental set-ups and to conduct experiments properly according to high-quality standards (even if it takes more time than initially allocated)?​&lt;br /&gt;
Do we review internal processes to make sure that there is no pressure to generate positive results? If there is such pressure, do we have processes to mitigate the risks?&lt;br /&gt;
When evaluating new job applications, do we pay attention to rigor of applicants’ research?​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== C. Resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Template to create a Mission Statement based on the above guidance - [https://paasp.sharepoint.com/sites/EQIPD/SiteAssets/EQIPD%20QS/Mission/1.1%20Mission.docx]1.1 Mission.docx&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experiences from the pilot phase of implementing research assessment reforms for hiring professors at BIH/Charité - [https://sfdora.org/2019/10/20/rewarding-robust-and-reproducible-research-experiences-from-the-pilot-phase-of-implementing-research-assessment-reforms-for-hiring-professors-at-bih-charite-merit-prof/|MERIT-PROF]​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Financial incentives to support re-use of open data, preregister and to publish negative (null) results - BIH QUEST examples​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to [[Toolbox]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Next item: [[1.2 Scope]]​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=74</id>
		<title>1.1 Mission</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=74"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T13:22:12Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== ​​​​​​​​​​​​A. Background &amp;amp; Definitions ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the EQIPD Quality System&amp;#039;s [[Implementation Strategy]], the first thing that the [[1.5.2.3 Process owner]] does is to prepare an answer to the questions why she / he has decided to implement a Quality System.  It is expected that this question will be asked not only by the members of her / his research unit but also by other colleagues and collaborators. Thus, Process Owner should be prepared to have a convincing answer that justifies the efforts and time that will be invested in the implementation and maintenance of the Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EQIPD terms, mission statement is a concise summary of why quality matters for the research unit. Please visit the [[Main Page|EQIPD Framework]] page for information on how EQIPD defines quality and examples of how different types of scientists answer the question &amp;quot;why quality matters&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
EQIPD emphasizes not the length of the mission statement but its ability to be understood and followed by all members of the research unit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This Toolbox item refers to one of the [[Core Requirements]]  (Core Requirement 3 - &amp;quot;The research unit must have defined quality objectives​​&amp;quot;).​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== B. Guidance &amp;amp; Expectations ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The mission statement may have the following sections:​&lt;br /&gt;
General statement about research data quality&lt;br /&gt;
​List what quality means in your environment or context.&lt;br /&gt;
Prioritize where quality does matter the most.&lt;br /&gt;
​Define the goal of your research unit or parent organization with regard to research quality.&lt;br /&gt;
What is at stake when research quality is not maintained&lt;br /&gt;
​Analyze the consequences of non-compliance or inferior quality for your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Describe the biggest risks for non-compliance or inferior quality in your environment.&lt;br /&gt;
List specific measures to be taken to address these risks.&lt;br /&gt;
​Quality objectives&lt;br /&gt;
​Describe what exactly shall the Quality System improve in your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Define the specific, measurable and traceable goals that your research unit and/or parent organization wants to achieve with the EQIPD Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
Define indicators for each objective and describe how you will use them.&lt;br /&gt;
More information can be found here [[Mission statement supporting information]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;PLEASE DO NOT FORGET&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
​​To make sure that an incentive and award/reward structure is aligned with the quality objectives (please refer to items 1.3.1-1.3.4 for more information). The following questions serve as example of how such alignment can be tested:&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage / support publication of negative results?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we recognize / reward high-quality results irrespective of the outcome (positive/negative)?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people to develop and implement risk-mitigating strategies and procedures? Do we recognize these efforts?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people not to rush experiments but to invest time and resources in developing/using robust methods, optimizing experimental set-ups and to conduct experiments properly according to high-quality standards (even if it takes more time than initially allocated)?​&lt;br /&gt;
Do we review internal processes to make sure that there is no pressure to generate positive results? If there is such pressure, do we have processes to mitigate the risks?&lt;br /&gt;
When evaluating new job applications, do we pay attention to rigor of applicants’ research?​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== C. Resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Template to create a Mission Statement based on the above guidance - [https://paasp.sharepoint.com/sites/EQIPD/SiteAssets/EQIPD%20QS/Mission/1.1%20Mission.docx]1.1 Mission.docx&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experiences from the pilot phase of implementing research assessment reforms for hiring professors at BIH/Charité - MERIT-PROF​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Financial incentives to support re-use of open data, preregister and to publish negative (null) results - BIH QUEST examples​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to [[Toolbox]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Next item: [[1.2 Scope]]​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=73</id>
		<title>1.1 Mission</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=1.1_Mission&amp;diff=73"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T13:21:17Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== ​​​​​​​​​​​​A. Background &amp;amp; Definitions ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the EQIPD Quality System&amp;#039;s [[Implementation Strategy]], the first thing that the [[1.5.2.3 Process owner]] does is to prepare an answer to the questions why she / he has decided to implement a Quality System.  It is expected that this question will be asked not only by the members of her / his research unit but also by other colleagues and collaborators. Thus, Process Owner should be prepared to have a convincing answer that justifies the efforts and time that will be invested in the implementation and maintenance of the Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EQIPD terms, mission statement is a concise summary of why quality matters for the research unit. Please visit the [[Main Page|EQIPD Framework]] page for information on how EQIPD defines quality and examples of how different types of scientists answer the question &amp;quot;why quality matters&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
EQIPD emphasizes not the length of the mission statement but its ability to be understood and followed by all members of the research unit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This Toolbox item refers to one of the [[Core Requirements]]  (Core Requirement 3 - &amp;quot;The research unit must have defined quality objectives​​&amp;quot;).​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== B. Guidance &amp;amp; Expectations ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The mission statement may have the following sections:​&lt;br /&gt;
General statement about research data quality&lt;br /&gt;
​List what quality means in your environment or context.&lt;br /&gt;
Prioritize where quality does matter the most.&lt;br /&gt;
​Define the goal of your research unit or parent organization with regard to research quality.&lt;br /&gt;
What is at stake when research quality is not maintained&lt;br /&gt;
​Analyze the consequences of non-compliance or inferior quality for your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Describe the biggest risks for non-compliance or inferior quality in your environment.&lt;br /&gt;
List specific measures to be taken to address these risks.&lt;br /&gt;
​Quality objectives&lt;br /&gt;
​Describe what exactly shall the Quality System improve in your research unit and/or parent organization.&lt;br /&gt;
Define the specific, measurable and traceable goals that your research unit and/or parent organization wants to achieve with the EQIPD Quality System.&lt;br /&gt;
Define indicators for each objective and describe how you will use them.&lt;br /&gt;
More information can be found here [[Mission statement supporting information]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;PLEASE DO NOT FORGET&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
​​To make sure that an incentive and award/reward structure is aligned with the quality objectives (please refer to items 1.3.1-1.3.4 for more information). The following questions serve as example of how such alignment can be tested:&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage / support publication of negative results?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we recognize / reward high-quality results irrespective of the outcome (positive/negative)?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people to develop and implement risk-mitigating strategies and procedures? Do we recognize these efforts?&lt;br /&gt;
Do we encourage people not to rush experiments but to invest time and resources in developing/using robust methods, optimizing experimental set-ups and to conduct experiments properly according to high-quality standards (even if it takes more time than initially allocated)?​&lt;br /&gt;
Do we review internal processes to make sure that there is no pressure to generate positive results? If there is such pressure, do we have processes to mitigate the risks?&lt;br /&gt;
When evaluating new job applications, do we pay attention to rigor of applicants’ research?​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== C. Resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Template to create a Mission Statement based on the above guidance - 1.1 Mission.docx&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experiences from the pilot phase of implementing research assessment reforms for hiring professors at BIH/Charité - MERIT-PROF​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Financial incentives to support re-use of open data, preregister and to publish negative (null) results - BIH QUEST examples​&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to [[Toolbox]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Next item: [[1.2 Scope]]​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=3.2.3_Implementation_of_the_EQIPD_Quality_System&amp;diff=11</id>
		<title>3.2.3 Implementation of the EQIPD Quality System</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.go-eqipd.org/index.php?title=3.2.3_Implementation_of_the_EQIPD_Quality_System&amp;diff=11"/>
		<updated>2020-09-01T11:21:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7: Created page with &amp;quot;​tba    ---------------- back to EQIPD Framework​&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;​tba&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----------------&lt;br /&gt;
back to EQIPD Framework​&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>2003:E5:272E:C1D:182E:E5:50C2:19B7</name></author>
		
	</entry>
</feed>