Determine the winner of research grants by drawing lots among suitable applicants. That is better than the judgment of committee, which is not only arbitrary but also non-transparent. APH researcher and professor of Methodology and Integrity Lex Bouter made this tantalizing proposal in his farewell lecture on Friday, September 23th. Bouter also made other concrete suggestions to stimulate the integrity of researchers.
“Designating the winner of a million-euro grant through a lottery may sound strange”, Bouter explains his striking idea. “In a lottery, fate determines which of the suitable candidates gets the grant, and that is clearly visible to all concerned. The current system in which a committee with experts designates the winner similarly contains all sorts of random elements.” Research shows that comparing research proposals is very difficult and debatable, Bouter argues. “This leads to a lot of frustration among researchers. Especially when the competition is decided on a tenth or hundredth point. They experience it as an non-transparent carousel.”
Designating the winner by lot has several advantages, Bouter believes. That draw should be done within the group of high-quality research proposals, however. “Then you can say that a researcher who falls outside the boat, ‘Your proposal was good enough to be funded, but you had bad luck with the draw.’ That feels very different from the letter you get now: ‘Your proposal has been rejected.’ With an implicit message: ‘You are a loser, it was not good enough.’” A second advantage of lots is that it is less conservative. “Many review committees consist of scientists around retirement age,” Bouter knows. “As a result, innovative ideas get less of a chance. With a lottery system, the winners are more diverse.”