3 ms·

Hiring someone with a reputation of standing up for proper academic conduct would signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide and that you also st

by m00x 7y ago

Hiring someone with a reputation of standing up for proper academic conduct would signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide and that you also stand for those values. This isn't a troublemaker, this is a proper academic who knows the importance of protocol and scientific process.

CrendKing 7y ago
The choice between 1) maintaining status quo, and 2) losing one or more professors who are bringing money in, if we push through the charges, for potential reputation gain. I think most business administrator would choose former.
- bonoboTP 7y ago
  I see that can be so in the US where hiring decisions seem to be more business oriented. Not sure if it works like that in every country. In Germany, professors have great freedom in choosing who to hire. For example phd student applicants directly contact and interview with the prof. Probably there is some form of veto from above though, but rarely exercised.
philipov 7y ago
> signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide This only matters if the outside cares very deeply about that, which it doesn't seem to, not enough to outweigh the benefit of not having to deal with incidents in the first place. You have to consider the real opportunity cost: signalling is less effective than silence.
labster 7y ago
Yes, and if academia was a fantasy land where everyone worked with the proper scientific process as a goal and no one needed more grant funding this would be great. I've gotten a lot of downvotes, and I'm not really sure why. This isn't my opinion of how things should be, it's based on what I observed in university. I knew a guy who tried the suing the university for messing up his graduate education thing -- life did not turn out well for him. The highest paid state employees are college football coaches, because they make the most money. Funds that used to help professors are pouring into middle management and image consultants. Modern universities are run with all of the techniques and moral flexibility of multinational corporations, and no amount of downvotes will change that.

by m00x 7y ago

CrendKing 7y ago

The choice between 1) maintaining status quo, and 2) losing one or more professors who are bringing money in, if we push through the charges, for potential reputation gain. I think most business administrator would choose former.

bonoboTP 7y ago
I see that can be so in the US where hiring decisions seem to be more business oriented. Not sure if it works like that in every country. In Germany, professors have great freedom in choosing who to hire. For example phd student applicants directly contact and interview with the prof. Probably there is some form of veto from above though, but rarely exercised.

philipov 7y ago

> signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide This only matters if the outside cares very deeply about that, which it doesn't seem to, not enough to outweigh the benefit of not having to deal with incidents in the first place. You have to consider the real opportunity cost: signalling is less effective than silence.

labster 7y ago

Yes, and if academia was a fantasy land where everyone worked with the proper scientific process as a goal and no one needed more grant funding this would be great. I've gotten a lot of downvotes, and I'm not really sure why. This isn't my opinion of how things should be, it's based on what I observed in university. I knew a guy who tried the suing the university for messing up his graduate education thing -- life did not turn out well for him. The highest paid state employees are college football coaches, because they make the most money. Funds that used to help professors are pouring into middle management and image consultants. Modern universities are run with all of the techniques and moral flexibility of multinational corporations, and no amount of downvotes will change that.