Defending against an oppresive culture that defines your identity strongly: academics and work conditions
I'm in a position where I meet lots of PhD people (and postdocs; let's call them PhDs). I don't know how much you know about academia, but the incentives are such that it generates extremely demanding jobs where only a few people at the top benefit (famous professors, project leaders). That sounds like a ponzi scheme right? The problem is that most of us (I was one of them!) never understand the 'game' till it's too late: you have invested years of your life and made academia part of your identity.
We have people:
- who are extremely intelligent
- with 'grit' (able to work on their skill for years, passionate, working ridiculous hours, weekends included...)
- who are creative as they have to come up with new ideas, push the boundaries of our knowledge
But this very same people are also:
- ... Low emotional intelligence, as demonstrated by how little they understand the 'deal' they got in academia
- Too absorbed to talk to each other. Plus they have deadlines, stress that prevent self-organization
- Absolutely uninterested in social dynamics/power. Only late in their careers, after being on the losing side of many power struggles, they understand that there was a game to be played and they did it wrong
I have a plan: give these PhDs enough power awareness so that they break free. In a way, it's like asking sect members to abandon their guru and rejoin society: a very hard task.
Do you think this is a good idea?
If so, given how dense and demanding PU is, what would be the shortest path to minimum viable power awareness? Remember our persona has
- little time
- little interest in learning power dynamics
With all their brain power, this group has accepted a miserable existence by choosing not to care about basic power. In a way they brainwashed themselves. So the adage "it's hard to help people who don't want to be helped" may apply here.
They are also risk averse and may find that they are 'good for nothing but academia' or that 'they have invested too much to let it all go to hell by moving to industry.'
So a hard case? Would you say it's worth trying? I'm prepared to invest some of my time in this and to organize some people in a coordinated effort.
Very very interesting.
It has the potential of both generating income, helping people, and to make the world a better place (since these smart, hard-working folks would be put to more productive use).
Academia Power Dynamics: The Info Is Out there (for the few who can see it)
Let me say first I had noticed the same at university, and it's one of the reasons I didn't pursue academia.
Second, if people were able to read between the lines, this book by Martin Seligman shows you academia is all about power dynamics and winning the "awards competition".
Same for the relationship between Kahnemann and Tversky, the pursuit of fame and dramatization by Angela Duckworth & Amy Cuddy, or for the slightly suspicious defenses of their work from the various Carol Dweck, Zimbardo, and John Bargh (self-defense all based on fame / "being right" / status , not advancing science).
PU is still valid as a "second step"
First off, I'd like to offer a reframe:
Even if took them 3 months to go through PU, that'd already be an immense gain of time.
However, I agree it's not the best starting point.
First Step: Condensed, "Shock Value" Article / Video
I think it's good first to "open eyes" before even offering solutions.
And I think we might provide that with a certain "shock value" condensed with an article and/or video first.
The article might only hint at solutions, but the main goal is to "pull the wool from their eyes".
I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
- Corporate manipulation:
- Political manipulation (will be improved, but a good start)
- How women control men (dubbed "female domestication")
- Charismatic leadership (wake up call of how it can easily turn poorly for the followers)
- Military manipulation (article to come soon)
- ....
It should be really well-written.
With examples and good pictures / infographics.
Ideally, from an insider, which would also increase the authoritativeness and credibility of the article....
Are you getting where I'm going with this, LOF?
Ready for the challenge?
Would you like to write such an article?
We can also discuss about a video on YB, and video and article can cross-reference each other.
---
(Book a call) for personalized & private feedback
Hello LoF,
I can definitely relate to that. I was a student and engineering and the purely research side of Academia did not appeal to me. The prestige was not appealing enough to me.
I am now in medicine and facing the same question again: shall I go into academic medicine, community hospital or private office practice?
Well, I can see that going to Academia for Academia's sake is not worth it. You work a lot for little rewards. You spend a lot of time working and not enough time for your private life.
So if you see yourself dedicating your life to Academia or a certain field or certain topic, go for it. Otherwise I would just go there to take the knowledge and move on as fast as possible.
It is definitely a trap and I see people who gave up a lot to get there and ended up unhappy and bitter. As you said it's a game with a lot of rewards for people at the top not for the rest. The cost is huge and it's important to be sure that it is one's life path.
I have worked at several universities. And have professor friends and I agree for most people it's a fools choice. I think climbing to the top isn't worth it. You get the same status and more money in private sector. If you can somehow own IP and spin off a company good. Dr Sinclair who discovered sirtuins is an example....and responsible for the pistachio mountain in my cupboard.
If you re willing to make the sacrifices for sheer love of the work.
Even if took them 3 months to go through PU, that'd already be an immense gain of time.
Yeah, 3 months of a few hrs per day they would not be able to afford. This would kill their career; they are extremely overworked people.
I've been drafting that shock post for... months 🙂 and I even have some YT videos on the topic.
The key here is to provide something actionable; this could vary with their topic/willpower/stage in life.
One extra constraint is that they often don't have money to invest in their education. And when they do, they often fall prey of the typical 'internet marketer/infoproduct guy' who sells them some 'business in a bottle' scam. After investing a few months in such scam, they are really burned out and have no runway left to try again (fail often, fail better). The mindset that got them to be successful in academia is almost the opposite of the mindset that they need to be successful on their own.
Often they land a 'shitty job', with abusive bosses, when they do manage to step out of academia. And often they are so traumatized that they don't really perform well in the (often unforgiving and full of power-players) corporate world.
Quote from leaderoffun on February 17, 2022, 1:49 amI've been drafting that shock post for... months 🙂 and I even have some YT videos on the topic.
The key here is to provide something actionable; this could vary with their topic/willpower/stage in life.
Awesome.
Do let me know if you want to publish /advertise on TPM and we can talk and work on it.
I think it would be very befitting the content of this website and that could help boost its reach / better reach and convince the academics.
---
(Book a call) for personalized & private feedback
Wow! I can relate a lot to this. As a graduate student, I was pretty naive and passive to start, only to find that the academic circle is all about power dynamics. For example, PhD students enter programs looking to have good mentorship, do interesting science etc. But if they don't play to the interests of their advisors/program/school, they would pay for it dearly - being sneakily abused, marginalized, and at best, ignored. In an environment that power differential is huge, it is hard to have personal freedom, and students and junior faculty are at the whim of those higher up. I think those successful in academia are those who are first extremely fit for a research career, and those who learnt the game early. I also find "covering your ass" and making yourself visible/branding to be extremely necessary in this kind of environment.
I think a lot more PhD graduates are looking to transition into industry because an academic career has become increasingly competitive and toxic. On the other hand, I also feel it is good to teach seasoned academics to fight fairly (cultivate the high power/high warmth leadership).