From Label to Level: Governance Choices impacting Recognition of (Professional) Doctorates

This paper compares the positioning of professional doctorates in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom to examine how governance choices (award-granting authority, admissions, assessment design, and programme locus) shape the international recognition and portability of doctoral degrees at EQF level 8. Using documentary analysis of legislation, agency guidance, and programme specifications, we synthesise recurring decision points that lead to misrecognition risks when professional doctorates prioritise practice-improvement over research originality. We then propose a concise Framework-for-Fit-and-Governance (FFG) checklist that translates recognition criteria into institutional levers: entry routes, mandatory outputs, viva/defence requirements, external examiners, and awarding powers. Applied to the Dutch UAS-Professional Doctorate and UK “named doctorates”, the checklist clarifies when programmes are likely to be evaluated as equivalent to the PhD and when they are not, and how design changes mitigate that risk. We discuss implications for senior leaders and quality units responsible for doctoral portfolios and for recognition bodies adjudicating cross-border credentials. The contribution is a practical tool for aligning professional doctorates with recognition frameworks while preserving their distinct aims, enabling institutions to make transparent trade-offs between professional impact and international portability.