This article explores the criteria for ‘good research’ employed by lecturers in traditional universities and institutes of higher professional education. The implementation of research-related activities in the latter created a repositioning of both types of Dutch institutions, similar as in many European higher education systems. The higher education institutes state their mutual difference is based on different types of research and research education, being more fundamental (or ‘Mode 1’) versus being more applied (or ‘Mode 2’). Lecturers’ criteria for
‘good research’ potentially have a considerable influence on the research character in different higher educational types, both in education and research. Hence, this study assumes that the presumed institutional differences can be seen in their lecturers’ criteria for ‘good’ research. In a focus group and interview study, participants were asked to elaborate on personal examples of ‘good’ and ‘nongood’ research. A thematic analysis resulted in six themes on ‘good research’. The differences between both groups of lecturers found are related to the value of the research, and do not reach the core of research quality. This shows how the policy intent to steer on institutional differences actually is successful, but also limited. Implications are discussed.