Under the revised structure, the first author and corresponding author each receive 30% credit, while the remaining 40% is distributed equally among all other authors. Currently, most universities require 10 publications for appointment or promotion to Associate Professor (BPS-20) and 15 publications for Professor (BPS-21). Institutions also require a minimum of five publications within the last five years equivalent to one paper per year.
The implications become evident when applied, for example, to a six-author paper: the first and corresponding authors each receive 30% credit, whereas each middle author receives 10%. A middle author aiming for 300 points, the equivalent of today’s requirement of 10 publications, would now need 30 papers. Similarly, meeting the “five publications in five years” criterion would translate into producing 15 weighted publications, effectively tripling the current expectation.
A comparable pattern holds at the Professor level. First and corresponding authors must produce 15 publications (15 × 30 = 450 points). In contrast, a middle author earning 10 points per paper would require 45 publications to reach the same threshold. This also alters the annual requirements: instead of one publication per year, middle authors may need to produce three times the current scholarly output.
The weighted system may further affect how universities award bonus marks for publications beyond the minimum requirement. Many institutions allow up to 20 additional marks, with principal authors receiving two marks per publication and co-authors receiving one. Using the weighted approach, first and corresponding authors would still need 10 papers to gain an additional 300 points, while middle authors would need roughly 30 papers to achieve the same total.
Supporters view the policy as a positive step towards recognising those who lead research efforts and take primary responsibility for manuscript preparation
These calculations reflect the promotion framework of a major public-sector university, where the minimum thresholds remain 10 publications for Associate Professor and 15 for Professor. Even with moderate upward changes, the move towards weighted authorship may place increased demands on middle authors, whose required output could become two to three times higher.
Feedback from the academic community has been mixed. Supporters view the policy as a positive step towards recognising those who lead research efforts and take primary responsibility for manuscript preparation. They also hope it will discourage honorary authorship and encourage more substantive contributions.
Others have expressed reservations, noting that collaborative and interdisciplinary fields may experience a disproportionate impact, especially for early-career researchers and postdoctoral fellows who contribute significantly but do not always obtain lead authorship. Concerns have also been raised regarding potential effects on large-team collaborations, increased competition for authorship positions, and whether current funding and institutional capacity can support these heightened expectations.
Another frequently raised point is that many universities continue to treat all indexed publications equally, without distinguishing between high-impact journals and standard indexed outlets. As a result, a paper published in The Lancet or Nature currently carries the same institutional value as one published in a routine Scopus or Web of Science journal.
Effective implementation of weighted authorship also requires enhanced funding mechanisms, strengthened research infrastructure, and more efficient administrative systems. Without corresponding enhancements, the heightened expectations may place additional strain on researchers who are already working with limited resources.