More appreciation for the academic

Meer waardering voor de wetenschapper

Paul Boselie (Universiteit Utrecht) and Bram Steijn (EUR)*

The academic of 2019 has to be a five-legged sheep. Doing top-level research, teaching, governing and supervising, collaborating with others AND generating societal impact. At the same time, the current selection and appreciation system of universities results in a one trick pony that, for the most part, publishes a lot and obtains research grants. In the appreciation aspect, education and societal impact play a less important role. This way of working has negative consequences: people crack (burn-out) or leave academia and young talented academics choose careers elsewhere. It is for a reason that academics united in the ‘WO in actie’ protest against high work pressure and inadequate appreciation. The well-being of academics and support staff is at risk.

This is why the academic system of recognising and appreciating is critically examined, and rightfully so. The observation that the time is right for a cultural change is also made by the universities and grant institutions united in VSNU, NFU, KNAW, NWO and ZonMW in their position paper Ruimte voor ieders talent. Rector Magnificus of Maastricht University Rianne Letschert spoke about this report in the TV discussion programme Buitenhof and emphasized that the consequence is mostly a behavioural change.

Cultural and behavioural changes not only require policy, but especially also implementation and internalisation (people management and leadership).

No tractors but expertise

Academics do not go to The Hague with tractors. They would rather deploy their knowledge and experience. We, a network of professors in HRM, emphasize that a large number of insights from HRM that are relevant for recognition and appreciation are already being applied in other public sectors, such as in hospitals and secondary schools. We believe that the effective continuation is important. Cultural and behavioural changes not only require policy, but especially also implementation and internalisation (people management and leadership).
In a cultural change of recognition and appreciation in higher education, we identify three important facets: the importance of a culture of collaboration, leadership and the threat of bureaucratisation.

Collaboration

Not everyone has to excel in everything. One particular academic excels in education, another one in publishing and yet another one in obtaining grants, in governing or in achieving societal impact. The emphasis on these various domains can also vary throughout someone's career. On top of that, teamwork, just like in other sectors, gets a more and more important role. There needs to be room for that in the appreciation as well.

Work and performance incentives will have to motivate people to collaborate. In that field, there are various empirically proven HRM models available in which autonomy and leeway are at the forefront.

Leadership: professionalisation

Leadership is important for all levels in academia. However, the current leadership model is mostly a ‘talented amateur model’. Professors are not, or rarely, appointed based on leadership qualities. These will have to be given more weight in recruitment and selection, as well as be represented stronger in training and education, and universities will really have to offer professors time for management leadership.

Bureaucratisation

For a new approach to recognition and appreciation, alternative lists, systems or a new index (such as a societal-impact index) are not the solution. These will result in new bureaucratisation. Research into handling performance criteria also shows that these lead to strategic behaviour on an individual level and ignore the resolutions to do it more differently and especially do more together. Appreciation of, for example, so-called “narratives” in which especially teams of academics justify their achievements in a coherent argument and with verifiable indicators is more likely the direction towards a solution.  

Cultural change: towards autonomy and leeway

A change of culture requires a behavioural change from all who are involved. Work and performance incentives will have to motivate people to collaborate. In that field, there are various empirically proven HRM models available in which autonomy and leeway are at the forefront. Academics need to be given professional leeway to collaborate, experiment and especially make mistakes as well. And exactly that is currently under pressure.

Use the insights from HRM

VSNU, KNAW, NFU, ZonMW and NWO want fundamental change. All in all: we have momentum. In this change, we should especially use the existing academic insights in the fields of human resource management, change management, culture and leadership. The following can be considered:
 

  • Involve HRM professors in the further planning and implementation on the various universities. This is their field, they work there themselves and many have governing and leadership positions. On top of that, they also have an eye for implementation and internalisation.
  • Use models for recruitment and selection, improvement, appointment and assessment, such as the MERIT model (management-education-research-impact-teamplayer), in which the important core domains are included.
  • Develop a leadership programme that is comparable to the education programme ‘SHRM for school leaders and school governors’ in secondary education.

The HRM academics of the Dutch HRM Network would love to devote themselves to this change.

* This opinion article is the shortened version of an article on ScienceGuide that is supported by the HRM Network Professors, which the following professors besides Paul Boselie (Utrecht University) and Bram Steijn (EUR) are members of: Tanya Bondarouk (Twente), Dirk Buyens (Gent), Dirk van Dierendonck (EUR), Deanne Den Hartog (UvA), Svetlana Khapova (VU), Eva Knies (Utrecht University), Dorien Kooij (Tilburg), Annet de Lange (OU/HAN), Eric Molleman (Groningen), Jaap Paauwe (Tilburg/EUR), Maria Peeters (Eindhoven/Utrecht), Pascale Peters (Nyenrode), Judith Semeijn (OU), Lidewey van der Sluis (Nyenrode), Marc van Veldhoven (Tilburg).