Research is increasingly divided into different scientific disciplines and this tends to lead to difficulties in associating knowledge from different specialized fields in projects of public usefulness such as for medical or OSH research. Is interdisciplinary scientific research easily evaluable? Objectives: This essay's objective is to explore the problem of scientific evaluation in this important area both for readers of P&R and those with a more general interest. The topic chosen represents an important problem for the development of such activities facing decision-makers and, to a lesser extent, peers, involved in a form of conservatism of paradigms, associated with mono-disciplines. The paper will discuss the robustness of traditionally used indicators in comparison with the perceived reputation of researchers involved in interdisciplinary projects. Methods: The study covers the topic of interdisciplinary actions using research results from different disciplinary fields. Most of the methodologies for assessing research performance nowadays are broadly based on bibliometric indicators. Advice on interdisciplinary activities is proposed and emphasis is placed on proposing better methods to assess researchers' reputations in complex fields which associate several scientific disciplines. Results: The paper does not provide direct results but the authors consider that this kind of proposal may represent one of the better bottom-up approaches to promoting change in the culture of some research assessors who need to take into account a new notion of excellence associated with an applied vision which must also of course benefit Society. Conclusions: No final conclusion is proposed in this essay which nonetheless argues in favour of a better level of evaluation for (good) interdisciplinary research