His comments prompted a thoughtful response from Prof. Jim Spire Ssentongo, who questioned whether research publication and problem-solving should be viewed as competing priorities.
A growing debate on the purpose of academic research has emerged following remarks by Dr. Lawrence Muganga, Vice Chancellor of Victoria University, who challenged fellow scholars to move beyond measuring success through publication numbers and focus instead on solving real-world problems.
Speaking on the role of academia in national development, Dr. Muganga argued that the current emphasis on publication metrics has become counterproductive.
“To my colleagues in academia, especially the professors, I think the time has come for us to stop counting publications,” he said. “Right now, it is almost immoral. We are doing a disservice to our country.”
He urged academics to prioritize innovation, practical solutions, and societal impact over the pursuit of journal articles and publication records.
“We should stop counting publications and start building things. We should focus on changing society. We should solve problems, and we should stand up and be counted for that,” Dr. Muganga said. “What matters is the impact we make, not the number of papers we publish.”
His comments prompted a thoughtful response from Prof. Jim Spire Ssentongo, who questioned whether research publication and problem-solving should be viewed as competing priorities.
“Are the two mutually exclusive? Can’t it be both?” Prof. Ssentongo asked. “Knowledge production is part of problem solving. Perhaps we should say that we need to do more than publishing, but not to give the impression that publication is unnecessary in problem solving.”
In response, Dr. Muganga clarified that he was not dismissing research altogether but advocating for research that directly addresses societal challenges.
“I agree, Prof. But such research should aim to create new knowledge that solves existing and anticipated problems, and to drive innovation or invention—not merely to count publications or secure promotion,” he said.
Prof. Ssentongo welcomed the clarification, emphasizing that publication remains a critical component of academic work and societal progress.
“Yes, I think that’s the right way to put it: ‘not merely to count publications’,” he said. “But publication itself is very important still.”
He further argued that the relationship between knowledge creation and innovation is often complex, noting that many groundbreaking innovations have been built upon scholarly work produced by researchers who were not directly involved in implementing practical solutions.
“There is some sort of division of labour in the nexus between publication and innovation,” Prof. Ssentongo explained. “Knowledge producers may not necessarily be the ones to practically innovate. Many innovators have relied on studies of scholars that did not engage in actual innovation.”
He cited influential thinkers such as Karl Marx, whose writings including Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto have shaped political and economic systems despite Marx not personally implementing his theories. He also referenced scholars and intellectuals such as Isaac Newton, Cheikh Anta Diop, and Ali Mazrui, whose ideas have informed generations of thinkers and practitioners.
“There is much more nuance to the linkages between knowledge production, uptake, and usage,” Prof. Ssentongo said.
The exchange highlights an ongoing conversation within higher education about how academic success should be measured, balancing the traditional role of research publication with increasing calls for universities and scholars to demonstrate tangible societal impact.