In accordance with the judgment date 13/12/2015 of Higher Education Council, it was decided that academic incentive payment would be given to the academicians based on their academic studies. This payment has been considered as a positive step and it seems that many academicians are satisfied with such kind of encouragement. On the other hand, it has been criticized as while the amount of research increases, the quality of research can decrease. This paper focuses on the views of academicians on academic incentive payment. The views of academicians on the positive and negative aspects of this payment, encountered problems and the reasons behind this decision form the research questions of this study. In this context, case study, one of the qualitative research designs, was carried out to answer research questions. The sample of the study consisted of 60 academicians from 3 different state universities. In order to get data, an open-ended questionnaire form was used. The data that were through content analysis showed that academicians believed that the goals of this incentive payment were to motivate academics to do research, to control academics, to increase interest in being academic and to increase the rank of universities in research. The positive aspects of this support were the increase in research, motivation of academics, academic awareness and interdisciplinary research. On the other hand, the negative aspects were decrease in quality of research, imperfections in ethical issues, and vagueness in criteria. Moreover, the training activities can fall into the second importance and the rule of at least 5 years journal can impact the development of journals negatively. Thus, it seems to be some amendments are needed. These amendments can be a) HEC should identify objective and faculty-based criteria for all universities, b) the studies including similar subjects and data should not be taken place in the scope of academic incentive payment, c) the rule of “journals publishing 5 and more years can be within the scope of academic incentive payment” should be reviewed, and d) academic incentive network can be formed.
Academic Incentive, Academic Motivation, Faculty Members, Doing Research, Increase in Research Publi