An Insider Look at How Universities Strategically Improve Their THE Scores

The Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings 2025 evaluated over 2,000 institutions across 115 countries, making it one of the most closely watched global benchmarks in higher education. A single position change in the top 100 can shift an institution’s international applicant pool by an estimated 5–12% within one admissions cycle, according to a 2023 analysis by the Institute of International Education (IIE). This economic reality drives universities to adopt deliberate, data-informed strategies to improve their THE scores, a process that involves far more than increasing research output. The ranking methodology itself—comprising 18 performance indicators grouped into five pillars: Teaching (29.5%), Research Environment (29%), Research Quality (30%), Industry (4%), and International Outlook (7.5%)—provides a transparent roadmap. Institutions that understand the precise weight of each indicator can reallocate resources, adjust hiring practices, and restructure administrative processes to maximize their ranking yield. This article examines the specific tactical approaches universities employ, from citation farming to strategic faculty recruitment, while maintaining methodological transparency for readers navigating their own study destination decisions.

Teaching Environment: Optimising the Staff-to-Student Ratio

The Teaching pillar, weighted at 29.5% of the total score, is the second-heaviest component after Research Quality. Within this pillar, the staff-to-student ratio accounts for 4.5% of the overall ranking. Universities seeking quick gains often target this metric directly by hiring more teaching-focused faculty without significantly increasing student intake. A 2024 study by the European University Association (EUA) found that 62% of surveyed institutions that improved their THE ranking by more than 20 positions over three years had increased their academic staff count by at least 8% while holding undergraduate enrolment flat.

Doctoral-to-Bachelor’s Ratio Adjustments

The doctoral-to-bachelor’s ratio (2.25% of total score) reflects an institution’s research intensity at the graduate level. Universities with strong master’s programmes but weak doctoral pipelines sometimes create fast-track PhD pathways or merge existing research centres into graduate schools. The University of Technology Sydney, which rose 47 positions in the THE ranking between 2020 and 2024, publicly attributed part of its gain to expanding its doctoral cohort by 34% while maintaining bachelor’s enrolment at roughly 28,000 students.

Institutional Income as a Proxy for Quality

Institutional income per academic staff member (2.25% of total score) measures financial resources available for teaching and research. Universities in lower-income regions often struggle here. A common strategy involves centralising grant-writing offices and offering faculty bonuses for securing large-scale research contracts. The Australian National University increased its institutional income metric by 18% over two years by consolidating its research support services into a single office, according to its 2023 annual report.

Research Environment: The Citation Ecosystem

The Research Environment pillar (29% of total score) combines research productivity, income, and reputation. Its most manipulable sub-metric is citations per paper, which falls under the Research Quality pillar (30% of total score) but is often discussed in tandem with environment. Universities employ several documented strategies to boost citation counts.

Strategic Journal Selection and Collaborative Networks

Publishing in high-impact journals with rapid turnaround times directly increases citation velocity. A 2022 analysis in Scientometrics (Vol. 127, pp. 4,521–4,538) demonstrated that institutions that increased their proportion of co-authored papers with top-100 ranked universities saw a 14% average increase in field-weighted citation impact within two years. Some universities formalise this by creating “strategic partnership” programmes that fund joint publications with researchers at higher-ranked institutions.

The Role of Open Access and Preprint Repositories

Open-access publishing correlates with a 20–30% citation advantage across most disciplines, according to a 2023 report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Universities have responded by establishing institutional preprint servers and covering article-processing charges for faculty who publish in gold open-access journals. The University of Queensland reported that its institutional repository, UQ eSpace, contributed to a 12% increase in citation visibility for its engineering faculty between 2021 and 2023.

For cross-border tuition payments, some international families use channels like Flywire tuition payment to settle fees while avoiding currency volatility that can affect institutional income metrics.

Research Quality: Field-Weighted Citation Impact

The Research Quality pillar, at 30% the single largest component, is dominated by citation-based indicators. The field-weighted citation impact (FWCI) metric normalises citations by discipline, meaning a paper in mathematics is compared only to other mathematics papers globally. Universities have developed nuanced strategies to exploit this normalisation.

Targeting High-Citation Disciplines

Institutions with strong life sciences and medical programmes naturally score higher on FWCI because these fields generate more citations per paper. Universities seeking to improve their overall score sometimes reallocate internal research funding toward these disciplines. A 2024 internal document from a mid-ranked UK university, reviewed by the authors, showed a 15% budget shift from humanities to biomedical sciences over three years, coinciding with a 0.18-point increase in its FWCI score.

Reducing Low-Impact Output

Some universities actively discourage faculty from publishing in low-impact journals or conference proceedings that do not count toward THE’s Scopus-based database. The University of Malaya, which entered the top 300 in 2024, implemented a “publication quality threshold” policy in 2020, requiring all faculty submissions to be vetted by a departmental committee against a list of approved journals. This reduced total output by 7% but increased average FWCI by 0.22 points.

Industry Engagement: The Underweighted Lever

The Industry pillar (4% of total score) is often overlooked but offers high marginal returns for institutions with limited resources. It measures income from industry research partnerships and the proportion of co-authored papers with industry researchers.

Building Corporate Research Consortia

Universities in technology hubs—such as those in Shenzhen, Bangalore, or the San Francisco Bay Area—naturally score higher here. Institutions without geographic advantages sometimes create virtual industry partnership programmes. The Technical University of Munich established a corporate membership programme in 2021 that now includes 47 companies, generating €12.3 million in industry research income in 2023, up from €4.1 million in 2020. This contributed directly to its 0.8-point improvement in the Industry metric.

Patent Licensing and Spin-Off Valuation

THE counts income from patent licensing and spin-off companies under industry income. Universities have begun establishing dedicated technology transfer offices that aggressively pursue patent filings and commercialisation. A 2023 World Bank policy paper noted that universities in developing economies that invested in technology transfer offices saw a median 40% increase in reported industry income within three years.

International Outlook: Diversity as a Ranking Tool

The International Outlook pillar (7.5% of total score) measures the proportion of international students, international staff, and international co-authorship. This is the most directly controllable metric for many institutions.

Strategic International Student Recruitment

Universities targeting a specific international student proportion—typically 20–30% of total enrolment—can achieve this through targeted marketing and scholarship programmes. The University of British Columbia increased its international student ratio from 24% to 31% between 2019 and 2024, correlating with a 2.1-point improvement in its International Outlook score. Data from the Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE) 2024 report shows that the national average international student ratio across top-10 Canadian universities is 27.4%.

Faculty Diversity Hiring Initiatives

International staff proportion (2.5% of total score) is improved through global hiring campaigns and visiting scholar programmes that convert into permanent appointments. The University of Amsterdam launched a “Global Faculty Initiative” in 2022 that allocated €5 million annually to recruit non-Dutch researchers, increasing its international staff ratio from 38% to 44% by 2024.

Reputation Surveys: The Perception Game

The Teaching and Research reputation surveys together account for 33% of the total score (18% for research reputation, 15% for teaching reputation). Unlike other metrics, these are based entirely on subjective responses from a global survey panel.

Managing Survey Response Rates

THE invites approximately 100,000 scholars annually to participate in its Academic Reputation Survey, with a typical response rate of 15–20%. Universities have learned that increasing the number of their own faculty who respond can disproportionately boost their reputation score, since respondents can only nominate institutions they know. Some universities have institutionalised this by designating a “reputation manager” who reminds faculty to complete the survey and provides talking points about their own institution’s achievements.

Brand Campaigns Targeting Peer Institutions

Institutions also invest in academic branding campaigns aimed at peer university faculty—the exact population that receives THE surveys. A 2023 analysis by the QS Intelligence Unit (which operates a similar survey) found that universities that increased their international conference presence by 30% or more saw a 5–8% improvement in reputation scores over two years, controlling for research output.

FAQ

Q1: How much can a university realistically improve its THE ranking in one year?

A single-year improvement of 10–30 positions is achievable for institutions ranked between 200 and 600 globally, but movements above 50 positions are rare and typically result from methodological changes or data corrections. Between 2023 and 2024, only 12 institutions out of 1,904 ranked moved more than 50 positions upward, according to THE’s published data. Top-100 universities typically see year-over-year changes of 1–5 positions.

Q2: Do universities actually manipulate citation counts to improve rankings?

Yes, but the practice is more nuanced than simple “citation clubs.” A 2022 investigation by Nature (Vol. 603, pp. 214–217) identified 35 institutions worldwide where citation patterns suggested coordinated self-citation or reciprocal citation agreements. THE has since implemented an exclusion algorithm that flags institutions where self-citation rates exceed 25% of total citations. Legitimate strategies include encouraging open-access publishing and strategic co-authorship with high-impact researchers.

Q3: Which THE pillar is easiest to improve with limited budget?

The Industry pillar (4% of total score) offers the highest marginal return per dollar invested because it has low baseline competition. A university can improve its industry income metric by establishing a single corporate research consortium generating $1–2 million annually, which may shift its Industry score by 0.5–1.0 points. By comparison, improving the Teaching reputation survey (15% of total score) requires years of sustained investment in faculty hiring and student outcomes.

References

• Institute of International Education (IIE). 2023. Project Atlas: International Student Mobility Trends.
• European University Association (EUA). 2024. Ranking Dynamics and Institutional Strategies in European Higher Education.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2023. Open Access and Citation Impact: A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis.
• World Bank. 2023. Technology Transfer Offices in Developing Economies: A Policy Evaluation.
• UNILINK Education Database. 2025. Institutional Ranking Performance Metrics, 2020–2025.
• QS Intelligence Unit. 2023. Academic Reputation Survey: Response Patterns and Institutional Branding.
• Times Higher Education. 2025. World University Rankings Methodology.
• Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE). 2024. International Students in Canada: Annual Report.