Having commented on the suggestion that 9 month contracts could be introduced in the UK, there’s another piece which suggests that universities must value their staff on more than their research outputs.
Even in the subset of fields where they are viable, metrics such as grant income and citations tell you only that someone’s work is popular with their peers.
As someone who’s work would fall more into the sphere of ‘public engagement’ than anything else, it’s something I’m watching with interest. Read the full article, including
The financial case is less clear-cut for areas such as engagement with policymakers, professions, the public and enterprise. But don’t you think a department is going to be a more interesting place to work and study if some of its staff are engaged in one or more of those activities? If you agree, then value the staff so engaged. Good management requires understanding of how varied activities contribute over time to a unit’s financial sustainability and intellectual environment.
