Fowler on academic rotation
Martin Fowler has just posted an excellent article on Academic Rotation, where he sets out the dichotomy that has arisen between how success is measured in academic circles versus commercial circles.
When describing the reaction he received to his advice to a post-doc to spend some time in industry to understand what software development problems require research he says:
His answer to this thought was very troubling. He said he’d be up to do that, but if he spent time in industry that would ruin his chances of getting a job in academia. Competition for academic jobs is high, and what they look it is your publication history. A year or two in industry would create a gap in your publication history that would be lethal to your job prospects.
Clearly,this is a real problem for academia in general, and in particular for a small country like Ireland that is striving to create an innovation culture through scientific and engineering research.
Fowler’s suggestion of rotation is an excellent one, but we probably need more. We need to ensure that industrial experience is seen as at least as a strength, indeed maybe even a pre-requisite, when considering academic appointments.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:55 am
I think that experience is both areas is a positive thing, but I also understand why the post-doc was not enthusiastic about it. I think that this problem already exists in Ireland. It is very easy to see that certain well funded research groups are “paper mills”.
Actually, I think that SFI is partially to blame here. Look at the eligibility criteria for the SIRG scheme (http://www.sfi.ie/content/content.asp?section_id=739&language_id=1):
“The applicant must demonstrate a proven record of internationally recognised independent research accomplishments. The applicant must be senior author (first, last or corresponding) on at least 3 articles in international peer-reviewed publications AND be a named author on an average of at least 1 international peer-reviewed publication per year since the award of the PhD (or equivalent).”
January 15th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Teknovis,
it’s certainly a tricky issue. I guess the point of Fowler’s argument, and one that I would agree with, is that we need to try to get away from a culture of publication for its own sake. Publication, or dissemination, should be on the back of strong work and important results.
Also, bear in mind that SIRG, and all of the other SFI programmes, are written for all disciplines. Engineering heavy disciplines are somewhat different than “standard” scientific ones in their relevance to practice as well as theory.