Abstract: Peer review has been the dominant method in Scientific Research Institutes evaluations, which plays a vital role in the strategy development and performance management of Scientific Research Institutes. Based on the practice of scientific research institutes evaluation in Chinese Academy of Sciences(CAS), Max Planck Society (M&P), the laboratory of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), this paper analyzes the differences and characteristics from comparisons of several elements, including the evaluation object and content, experts sources and types, experts selection criteria and mechanisms, peer review organization and use of evaluation results. Lastly, this paper put forward some suggestions about peer review assessment approach in the future.

摘要： 同行评议一直是科研机构评价中的主导方法，对科研机构的战略发展与绩效管理起着至关重要的作用。本文基于中国科学院（CAS）、德国马普学会（M&P）、美国能源部（DOE）实验室、美国标准与技术研究院（NIST）等世界上主要科研机构评价中同行评议的实践与方法，剖析科研机构评价中运用同行评议方法的关键要素，包括评议的对象与内容，专家来源与类型，专家遴选标准与机制，同行评议的组织方式以及评议结果的使用等，分析其差异与特点，提炼出不同的模式，并在此基础上针对科研机构未来的同行评议方法提出建议。

关键词: 国立科研机构, 同行评议方法, 模式比较, National Research Institution, Peer Review Method, Model Comparison