'New Public Management' or 'Republic of Science'?

In the wake of 'New Public Management', performance evaluation in research is more and more based on output measures. Ranking according to numbers of publications, citations, and impact factors is an important example.

To what extent do these measures contradict the goals of the 'Republic of Science'? Do rankings substitute a 'taste for science' by a 'taste for publication'?

Prof Margit Osterloh discusses advantages and disadvantages of output measurement compared to qualitative peer control. In order to mitigate the tensions between the concept of the 'Republic of Science' and 'New Public Management', she proposes to focus on measures such as input control, random selection and awards.