Reputation, citations, and data: How much influence do institutions have over their QS World University Rankings position?

Why data submission matters

Submitting data through QS HUB is a key method for institutions to support accurate ranking performance. QS HUB is the platform used for institutional data submission across major rankings projects, and it allows universities to provide the most up-to-date information on faculty, students and programmes. This matters because using current, validated data helps ensure that the institution is represented fairly in the ranking analysis. It can also strengthen internal processes by prompting teams to review definitions, align records and confirm that the figures being shared externally match institutional reporting.

Paying close attention to data definitions is just as important as submitting the data itself. QS applies specific, standardised definitions across all institutions, which may differ from how terms are used internally or across the wider sector. For example, “faculty” can be defined in multiple ways globally, but within QS it includes only those staff roles that meet our defined criteria, as outlined here. Misalignment between institutional definitions and QS definitions can lead to inconsistencies in submitted data, which may affect how an institution is represented in the analysis. Review definitions carefully within QS HUB before submission to help ensure that data is aligned, comparable and accurately reflects institutional structures.

It is important to note that data submitted by institutions is not the only source we use when compiling the Rankings. For more on the QS World University Rankings methodology, read this article. Universities can still be included in the QS World University Rankings even if they do not submit data, as QS also draws on externally collected sources. However, without institution-submitted data, the analysis relies more heavily on third-party information, which may not fully reflect the university’s current structure or performance, making its representation less accurate. Learn more.

How reputation performance is supported

Reputation indicators are informed by our Global Academic and Employer Reputation Surveys, which measure how institutions and programmes are perceived by academics and employers. Institutions can contribute to the process by submitting relevant contacts, helping ensure appropriate representation within the survey sample. In practice, this means reputation performance is not something an institution can directly engineer, but it can strengthen the integrity of Ranking performance and ensure the relevance of the network through which an institution’s reputation is assessed.

Citations, research data and institutional mapping

Research-based indicators such as Citations per Faculty rely on data collected from Elsevier Scopus, which QS uses as a core source for papers and citations analysis. Because this information depends on affiliation data and institutional mapping, universities should review how their research output is connected to their institution within Scopus. If affiliations are incomplete, inconsistent or incorrectly mapped – for example, if an institution’s Business School research activity is properly feeding in to overall institutional performance - research performance may not be fully reflected in the data used for rankings. For that reason, checking institutional mapping becomes a practical step that helps protect the accuracy of research representation in rankings analysis.

Assessing current data in My QS

My QS gives institutions a central place to monitor ranking performance, access real-time updates and review historical data. For communications, planning and performance teams, this makes it easier to track changes, share insights internally and identify where institutional records may need updating. While My QS does not replace the formal submission process, it plays an important role in helping institutions stay informed and proactive. In practical terms, keeping My QS information current supports better visibility, stronger internal alignment and faster action when updates are needed.

So, how much influence do institutions really have?

Institutions do not control their QS World University Rankings performance outright. What they can control is the quality, completeness and accuracy of the information that shapes how they are evaluated. Accurate data submission, active profile management, timely survey contact provision and regular checks on research mapping all contribute to more reliable representation. For universities looking to strengthen Ranking performance over time, nothing is a substitute for truly improving performance. Ultimately, an institution’s rank improves by improving as a university – accurate data submission just ensures this transformation is accurately reflected.