Friday 31 May 2013

Is your PI a dick or a loser?_Guest post


The original post and comments to it you can find on: 

Reza Ghadiri, The Scripps Research Institute, Science — and all that jazz


Is your PI a dick or a loser?



May 4, 2010 19,085 views
Imagine yourself as a PI (principal investigator), head of a laboratory, professor in an academic institution somewhere. (That is, if you aren't already.) As a PI, you have to worry about many things. Let's take a closer look at one of them. Namely, how do you make those PhD students and postdocs work their asses off for you?
If you care about climbing the ladder of academic success, it is what you want. If you don't yet have tenure, it is what you desperately need. Most professors have no time (or desire) to do any lab work themselves. It all comes down to students and postdocs. And how hard they work depends on how well their PIs motivate them.
Bonuses, pay raises, promotions and stock options are commonly used for motivational purposes in the business world. But we are not in the world of business here. This is Sparta! Academia. Fortunately, a PI can employ other methods of workforce motivation. Unfortunately, most of them aren't pretty.
Sweatshops aside, only in their wildest dreams can corporate bosses have such power over their employees as research professors have over their PhD students and postdocs. There are no labor unions to worry about, no strikes, no contracts, no concept of overtime. It's up to the PI to make the rules. And with their diplomas and careers on the line, it's up to the students and postdocs to suck it up and cooperate.
PIs who are not aggressive at riding the backs of their group members are at a serious disadvantage against the PIs who are. Speaking crudely but bluntly, it's a choice of being either a dick or a loser. For those professors who choose to be ambitious, two basic options, or archetypes, are available for adoption:

1. The Slave Driver

The Slave Driver approach is to demand, control and get. It's a relatively straightforward, reliable strategy of "my way or the highway". A slave driver PI might:
  • enforce a strict schedule of (long) working hours in the lab;
  • phone in or drop by the lab on Saturday nights to make note of who is slacking off;
  • personally check everybody's laboratory notebooks on a regular basis;
  • praise group members who manage to work 36 hours straight, without sleep, all the while handling toxic or explosive chemicals;
  • threaten, yell, and generally have a "bad side" people are terrified of getting on, etc.

2. The Manipulator

Relies on a more subtle and artful approach. Manipulators excel at inspiring other people to do what they want them to. A manipulator PI can:
  • convince (in effect, brainwash) a person to believe that literally nothing in the world is more important than to "work hard and get good results";
  • gain trust by acting like a pal, or a father/mother figure, rather than like a boss;
  • have you believe he/she both a) has got your best interests at heart, and b) knows what's best for you;
  • look for a person's individual "buttons" and push them to achieve desired effects on behavior;
  • masquerade genuine concern for research progress as caring about the people involved;
  • play on human egos, hopes, fears, etc.
And, of course, there are varying degrees and lengths different professors will go to in acting out either or both of the above general strategies at different stages of their careers. The moral of the story is: PIs who act like dicks (or, pardonnez-moi, like bitches) should not be judged too harshly. After all, they are simply trying to be good at their jobs.

Sunday 19 May 2013

Simulacrum: the Swedish Higher Education Authority


Ministry of Education and Research Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Stockholm Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Sweden Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
May 20, 2013 Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
 Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
The reflection on the eleven months-long communication

Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
In July 2012 I sent to SHEA a complaint about the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU). I have been forced to do it because my home university for six months refused to investigate the problem which I faced during my education. I emphasize again: I didn't complained about the decision that SLU made; the problem was that SLU ignored all my request to investigate the problem. My appeals to SHEA were: Swedish university of agricultural sciences
  1. to establish the correct data of my admission to the third-cycle study program at SLU
  2. to investigate whether SLU provided the necessary conditions for the education to be completed
  3. to investigate whether the resources from my study have been withdrawn in accordance with the legal procedure
On May 13th, 2013 I have got the final decision from SHEA and now I feel that it is a time to summarize my experience of long-term communication with this authority. Among the main activities that SHEA claimed on its homepage are: student's rights, the quality assurance, and monitoring of the efficiency. However the facts, on example of my case, showed that none of these claims was fulfilled.
SHEA cannot monitor the efficiency of other educational institutions, because it is not efficient itself. It took SHEA eleven months to go through my complaint. This time-scale can be called efficient only if the purpose was to wait until my financial resources would be exhausted and I would be forced to leave Sweden, withdrawing my complaints.
SHEA cannot evaluate the quality of education. I presented written evidences that my former supervisor for 2 years (two years!) have been refusing to provide me with any feedback. His non-professional attitude made impossible to publish the results of my research and nullify the possibility to complete my studies. Later, when I applied to SLU with a request to change the inefficient supervisor, this request was ignored again. Today, after 16 months (more then one year!) since I requested for a change of the supervisor, SLU still cannot provide my studies with an adequate supervision. SHEA commented on this point of my complaint that this problem is an internal matter of SLU. Thus, students in Sweden are left under the yoke of the educational institution with no opportunity to complain.
SHEA does not aim to guarantee the right of students. The only document that I requested from SLU and later on from SHEA was a copy of my admission to the third-cycle of education dated by the June 2007. I requested this document because SLU insisted that my studies have started in June 2007 and I only had a copy of admission to the third-cycle education dated by June 2010. Since I feel myself totally entitled to request documents that are relevant to my own education, I didn't understand the grounds why SLU and later SHEA were so persistent in ignoring my request at the beginning and even directly refusing it later. The only reason would be that this document does not exist and my education started only in 2010. SLU practices the exploitation of foreign students during several years before the students can “earn” the permission to start their own research project and SHEA shielded this practice of modern slavery.
Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences 
Summarizing all above mentioned facts I state that the Swedish HigherEducation Authority is a simulacrum. It aimed to create a false image that the rights of the students who intended to obtain their degree in Sweden are guaranteed and protected. The only mission of SHEA is to guarantee that the Swedish educational institutions, which violate student rights would be fully shielded from any problems. However, I believe, that in the era of Internet the ancient policy of hushing up problems will be no longer efficient; quit opposite it became laughable. So, if there are sensible politicians in the Government of Sweden they ought to recognize that the policy pursued by SHEA sooner or later will lead to the complete discredit of the image of Swedish education and their own reputations.
Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
 Swedish university of agricultural sciences Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Elena K
Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Dept Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Uppsala, Sweden
Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Swedish university of agricultural sciences

Monday 13 May 2013

"Independent" Swedish media


The major problem during my conflict with the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences was to make them following the legal procedures. Several colleagues insistently recommended me to contact Swedish newspapers and TV. They were sure that the main goal of Swedish mass media is to honestly inform public about what is going on in Sweden and abroad. I already had an experience with Swedish media and was not that optimistic. Few years ago my Russian friend was accused of being a spy (he must be Russian, otherwise who would believe to the story?). The information about his “spying activities” were changed several times: from being suspected in an intention to kill all Swedish potato with dangerous virus; to the accusation of biking around Uppsala on his old bicycle and gathering information about the “secret objects”. Nevertheless, some newspapers contacted me asking for an interview, but when they found out that my point of view differ from the “correct” one, they immediately lost their interest.
Well, since my colleagues were very sure that that was very-very atypical for Sweden they insisted on contacting Swedish media. The more media we sent the information about what is going on in SLU the longer became faces of my optimistic colleagues. None even replied us! When at last the local TV station sent a crew to make the interview my colleagues became very happy, and clapping me on the shoulder, they ensured me that now we attract public attention to the problem and SLU will be forced to follow the rules. However, the short story about the conflict between SLU and a student has never been shown.
Probably, my case is a very small problem to make Swedish public be aware of. However, how one can explain that Swedish media refuse to publish even comments of Ambassadors on the articles, which accused other countries in “bad deeds”. The answer is: the only one point of view should be translated to the Swedish public. The “correct” one!
Below is the comment of the Russian Embassy on refuse of the Swedish newspaper to publish the reply of the Ambassador Mr. Neverov to their article (Google-translation from Swedish):

“In connection with the recent tragic events in Boston wrote on Apr. 21, 2013 "Dagens Nyheter" editor Peter Wolodarski an article, the Russian Federation's Ambassador to Sweden Igor Neverov preparing a response notice, the "Daily News" chose not to publish the reference to "... the Russia has a different perspective on the last decades of conflict in Chechnya than that found expression in the Daily News last ... not for us to make room for a rebuttal "(signed John Aman, director of the master editor). Given that Russia's perspective is not so well known in Swedish media took the ambassador's decision to publish the above answer, the article on the Embassy website.”

Now which country should be accused in totalitarianism?