🚀 go-pugleaf

You ask a good question; it will be interesting to see what results it
produces.
Part of the problem is going to be defining what research is:  Much of what
public and private researchers do is information collection and analysis;
applied research that supports decision making processes.  Some may not call
that research, but what they call "pure" research may not be directly useable
for contemporary decision making.
When I worked for a public agency as a mid-level supervisor I evaluated both
management and research biologists.  We expected our research staff to perform
two  basic functions:  Develop or perfect techniques that could be used by
management biologists, and conduct information collection and analysis studies
that were beyond the scope of management biologists' time and ability.  If
their results were useful to the management biologists and decision makers,
then they were evaluated as successful although we did not use any such
criteria in their annual evaluations.  Annual evaluations tended to be based
on meeting immediate and specific research project goals and completing
research publications or papers.  Management biologists also did what some
might call research but this usually was a replication of techniques developed
by research biologists (e.g., telemetry, necropsies, habitat analysis).
Efforts and results would be evaluated on the basis of the utility of
information produced, i.e., could it be used to make immediate management
decisions.  However, there was a lingering tendency to evaluate biologists on
the basis of effort expended rather than results obtained, i.e., how many elk
were radio tagged and relocated rather than the utility of the obtained
information.  Looking back, it would have been even more effective to evaluate
management and research biologists on the basis of meeting long term
objectives in meeting such management goals and population productivity (for
harvested species) or sustainability (for habitats, ecosystems and non-
harvested species).
Now that I'm in the private consulting sector, what we do has to be even more
closely tied to decision making needs.  We seldom are asked to develop new
techniques, although there is frequent need to refine techniques to make the
more field effective.  The immediate evaluation tends to be in the form of
contract payments and renewals; there is little incentive to publish.  Failure
to develop quality information that could be used to meet client's decision
making needs means you eventually go out of business as a consultant; that's
the ultimate evaluation, I would guess.
Let me know if you need more information, specifics, or examples.

Warren W. Aney
Senior Wildlife Ecologist