4 ms·

Still not clear why a university research lab would keep this running 'for a few more days' and not pull the plug immediately until either having the costs unde

Still not clear why a university research lab would keep this running 'for a few more days' and not pull the plug immediately until either having the costs under control or some sort of reasonal matching benefit in place.

Aeolun 7y ago
Probably because they have to spend their grant money some way.
- skissane 7y ago
  One hears stories about researchers with unspent grant money scrambling madly to find something, anything, to spend it on before the grant expires. Use it or lose it. My Dad told me how back in the 1970s he worked at a government-funded research lab. One time they called up a laboratory glassware supplier and said "We'd like to order $10,000 worth of glassware". The supplier asked "Sure, what specifically would you like to order?" The lab replied "We don't care, whatever you have in stock, so long as it costs us $10,000 and we pay you today – if we don't spend the money today we lose it forever".
  - skohan 7y ago
    It sounds like there is a missing incentive to go under budget. There's something wrong with the system if people feel like they just have to burn money.
    - mschuster91 7y ago
      > It sounds like there is a missing incentive to go under budget. Other way around. Right now there exists a negative incentive to go under budget, being that if you need extra budget next year you suddenly don't have a buffer. The correct way to fix things is to simultaneously prohibiting end-of-FY budget-keeping purchases (e.g. by mandatory reviewing of purchases) while at the same time allocating a company/organization wide buffer for stuff that needs immediate / projected stuff that was not in the planned budget.
    - cobookman 7y ago
      I like how google did employee travel. They calculated a cap = 2/3 * historical employee data + 1/3 * current cost of business flight. Obviously for common routes such as Sf to la, nyc to sf...etc they hard coded values. for every $1 under the cap you received 50cent to use on a future travel plan over the calculated cap. You could fly economy on an international flight saving money, then bank 50% of savings to buy a first class ticket some other time. This created a negative feedback loop keeping travel costs in check.
  - coremoff 7y ago
    I came across a similar thing in the 90s; one department had an expensive piece of equipment with a three year lifespan. They weren't allowed to amortise that, and any budget increase every three years would have been denied, so they had to include the whole replacement cost in every budget, and find ways of spending that money every year, or lose it.
    - krick 7y ago
      Uh, I mean, of course I don't know any better than you, but I think parent wasn't entirely serious... obviously. Was he?
      - blackearl 7y ago
        I have zero proof of this, but I've heard of the US Navy having jets fly out, dump fuel, and come back to refuel minutes later, just to fill out a budget. Lose it or lose it is not uncommon unfortunately
      - Filligree 7y ago
        He was absolutely serious. It's complete nonsense, of course, but this is also reality.
  - linker3000 7y ago
    Yep, back in the day when I worked for an IT dealer/distie, at certain times of the year, the client conversations went: "How many <Brand> laptops can I get for £xK?" "What kind of spec are you looking for?" "Don't care, just as many as I can get of 'something' for £xK."
subject117 7y ago
Because it’s probably government funded. If it’s not burning a hole in your own pocket it’s not worth staying up all night over.
- stagger87 7y ago
  BYU is not federally funded.
PeterStuer 7y ago
All the AI and CS labs I worked for were perpetually short of funding. The end of year budget things is an accounting pitfall that I have met many times in industry, government and academia alike. I tis the result of money allocated but not spend before the end of the budget year not just is taken away, but also with high probability leading to a budget reduction the next year as 'you clearly didn't need it'. Needs otoh aren't clearly delineated by the budget calendar.

Aeolun 7y ago

Probably because they have to spend their grant money some way.

skissane 7y ago
One hears stories about researchers with unspent grant money scrambling madly to find something, anything, to spend it on before the grant expires. Use it or lose it. My Dad told me how back in the 1970s he worked at a government-funded research lab. One time they called up a laboratory glassware supplier and said "We'd like to order $10,000 worth of glassware". The supplier asked "Sure, what specifically would you like to order?" The lab replied "We don't care, whatever you have in stock, so long as it costs us $10,000 and we pay you today – if we don't spend the money today we lose it forever".
- skohan 7y ago
  It sounds like there is a missing incentive to go under budget. There's something wrong with the system if people feel like they just have to burn money.
  - mschuster91 7y ago
    > It sounds like there is a missing incentive to go under budget. Other way around. Right now there exists a negative incentive to go under budget, being that if you need extra budget next year you suddenly don't have a buffer. The correct way to fix things is to simultaneously prohibiting end-of-FY budget-keeping purchases (e.g. by mandatory reviewing of purchases) while at the same time allocating a company/organization wide buffer for stuff that needs immediate / projected stuff that was not in the planned budget.
  - cobookman 7y ago
    I like how google did employee travel. They calculated a cap = 2/3 * historical employee data + 1/3 * current cost of business flight. Obviously for common routes such as Sf to la, nyc to sf...etc they hard coded values. for every $1 under the cap you received 50cent to use on a future travel plan over the calculated cap. You could fly economy on an international flight saving money, then bank 50% of savings to buy a first class ticket some other time. This created a negative feedback loop keeping travel costs in check.
- coremoff 7y ago
  I came across a similar thing in the 90s; one department had an expensive piece of equipment with a three year lifespan. They weren't allowed to amortise that, and any budget increase every three years would have been denied, so they had to include the whole replacement cost in every budget, and find ways of spending that money every year, or lose it.
  - krick 7y ago
    Uh, I mean, of course I don't know any better than you, but I think parent wasn't entirely serious... obviously. Was he?
    - blackearl 7y ago
      I have zero proof of this, but I've heard of the US Navy having jets fly out, dump fuel, and come back to refuel minutes later, just to fill out a budget. Lose it or lose it is not uncommon unfortunately
    - Filligree 7y ago
      He was absolutely serious. It's complete nonsense, of course, but this is also reality.
- linker3000 7y ago
  Yep, back in the day when I worked for an IT dealer/distie, at certain times of the year, the client conversations went: "How many <Brand> laptops can I get for £xK?" "What kind of spec are you looking for?" "Don't care, just as many as I can get of 'something' for £xK."

subject117 7y ago

Because it’s probably government funded. If it’s not burning a hole in your own pocket it’s not worth staying up all night over.

stagger87 7y ago
BYU is not federally funded.

PeterStuer 7y ago

All the AI and CS labs I worked for were perpetually short of funding. The end of year budget things is an accounting pitfall that I have met many times in industry, government and academia alike. I tis the result of money allocated but not spend before the end of the budget year not just is taken away, but also with high probability leading to a budget reduction the next year as 'you clearly didn't need it'. Needs otoh aren't clearly delineated by the budget calendar.