scientific research as a career by finlay macritchie

K13197_cover.fhmx 5/25/11 10:22 AM

Composite

C M Y CM MY CY CMY K

K13197

w w w. c r c p r e s s . c o m

an informa business

6000 Broken Sound Parkway, NWSuite 300, Boca Raton, FL 33487711 Third AvenueNew York, NY 100172 Park Square, Milton ParkAbingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN, UK w w w . c r c p r e s s . c o m

Scientif ic Researchas aCareer

Scientific Research as a CareerM

acRitchie

“This will be a very important resource for beginning scientists so they can see what thefield is like, especially this all important topic of how to build prestige and a track recordfor excellence.”

—John D 'Angelo, Alfred University, New York

Describing the philosophy of the scientific method and the training and professional characteristicsneeded for a successful career, Scientific Research as a Career is a comprehensive “how-to”guide for the aspiring scientist. Based on the author’s experience both as a scientist in a researchorganization and as a university mentor, the book covers:

• The interaction between management and leadership principles and scientific research

• Qualifications and attributes usually required to become a successful researcher

• History, application, and prerequisites of the scientific method and scientific progress

• Exploration of the careers of pivotal and influential scientists

The author highlights the importance of networking and the value of forming contacts withcolleagues, joining scientific associations, attending conferences, making presentations, andacting as chairs for conference sessions. He also touches on the many areas outside of “thescience” that readers are likely to encounter during their career, such as mentoring, supervisingresearch students, and managing a group. The book clearly delineates not only the challengescurrently facing scientists, but also how to overcome them and achieve success in their careers.

GENERAL REFERENCE

Scientific Researchas a

Career

CRC Press is an imprint of theTaylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Boca Raton London New York

Scientific Researchas a

CareerFinlay MacRitchie

CRC PressTaylor & Francis Group6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742

© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLCCRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4398-6967-3 (eBook - PDF)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reason-able efforts have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com (http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organiza-tion that provides licenses and registration for a variety of users. For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site athttp://www.taylorandfrancis.com

and the CRC Press Web site athttp://www.crcpress.com

vii

© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC

Contents

Foreword ix

Preface xi

TheAuthor xiii

1 Introduction 1MotivationandRequisitesforaResearchCareer 1EarlyInterestandaSimpleResearchProblem 3ImportanceofCombiningStudywithExperimentation 4References 5

2 ScientificTrainingandPersonalDevelopment 7UniversityQualifications 7Bachelor’s,Master’s,andDoctoralDegrees 7ResearchPh.D.versusCombined ResearchandCourseWork 8ImaginativeandRegimentedThinking 10ThePh.D.PreliminaryExamination 10ResearchversusCollectingData 11OralandWrittenExaminations 12LimitationsofStatistics 12Accuracy:AretheResultsWhatAreIntendedtoBeMeasured? 13WhereToafterGraduation? 15MainAreasforEmploymentofScienceGraduates 15InternshipsasaPrecursortoEmployment 16Networking,JoiningAssociations,ConferencePresentations 17References 19

3 TheScientificMethod 23TheScientificMethod,Empiricism,Induction 23KarlPopper:AnalysisofEarly 20th CenturyTheories 23Demarcation:ACriteriontoDistinguishbetweenScienceandNonscience 25MythsasPrecursorsofScientificHypotheses 26

Contents

viii


ExploratoryWorkPrecedingHypotheses 27GrowthofScientificKnowledge 27DangerstoGrowth:LackofMotivationforInquiry,MisplacedFaithinPrecision,Authoritarianism 28HowScientificResearchCanBePutOffTrackDeliberately 29HowScientificResearchCanBePut OffTrackUnintentionally 30References 32

4 AttributesRequiredbyResearchScientists 33CitationsasaCriterionforResearchValue 33ConceptualThoughtRequiredtoFormHypotheses 34Detachment 35Perseverance 36EthicalStandards—Plagiarism 37Publication 38Service:PeerReviewing 41Service:ServingonAwardsCommittees 43Grantsmanship 44References 52

5 TheImpactofManagerialism 53TheManagerialIdeology 53CommonwealthScientificandIndustrialResearchOrganization(CSIRO)ofAustralia 54ReviewsofCSIRO 54EffectsofMcKinseyReview 55FreedomofExpressioninScience 58AFalsePremise 60PerformanceCriteriaforScientists 61InfluenceofManagerialismonScientists 62TheRisksofCorruptPractices 64CopingwithEffectsofManagerialStress 67References 68

6 LeadershipinScience 71Mentoring 72SupervisionofResearchStudents 72QualitiesNeededtoLeadScientificResearch 75ServantLeadership 76TheInvertedPyramid 77TheFuture 79References 80

Contents

ix


7 InsightsfromNotableScientists 81MarieCurie(1867–1934) 81CharlesDarwin(1809–1882) 83AlbertEinstein(1879–1955) 85RosalindFranklin(1920–1958) 86GalileoGalilei(1564–1642) 88DorothyHodgkin(1910–1994) 89IrvingLangmuir(1881–1957) 91LiseMeitner(1878–1968) 93GregorMendel(1822–1884) 94LouisPasteur(1822–1895) 96NikolaTesla(1856–1943) 97References 99

8 FutureChallengesforScientificResearch 101TwoAreasforChangeinDirection 101WhyAreHumanstheOnlySpeciestoHaveProgressedCulturally? 102WhyPresentFundingProceduresforResearchAreUnsatisfactory 103StiflingofCreativityinScienceCanStuntFutureEconomicGrowth 105SuppressionofFreedomCausesStagnationofKnowledge 106TheNeedforaChangeintheWorkingEnvironmentfor Research 107References 109

xi


Foreword

Non plus ultra (“nothingmorebeyond”)was thewarningto thosewhosailedtheMediterraneanSea.AccordingtoGreekmythology,thesewordswerewrittenonthePillarsofHercules,attheStraitofGibraltar,markingtheedgeofthethen-knownworld.

Theattitudewas:“Gonofurther!”“Nothingmoretodiscover!”Today,wemightsay:“Wehavehitabrickwall!”

Ignoringtheancientwarning,themottoPlus ultra(“thereismorebeyond”)wasadoptedbyCharlesV,KingofSpain, followingthediscoveryoftheAmericas.

Butisthere“morebeyond”today?Therearenonewcontinentstodiscover,nonewfrontierstocolonize,nonewchemicalelementstobenamed.Wehavewalkedonthemoon.WehaveprobedtheSolarSystemandbeyond.Isexplorationdead?

Have we now exhausted the possibilities for adventure, fordiscovery,forexcitement,forexploration?Havewehittheproverbial“brickwall?”IstherereallyNon plus ultra?

No,no,no!Explorationisnotdead.Thereismuch“morebeyond.”ArmyourselfwiththemottoofCharlesV:Plus ultra.Butinstead

ofvoyagingbeyondthelimitsoftheMediterranean,voyagebeyondthe limits of our scientific knowledge. Instead of donning theseaman’ssou’wester,assumethemantleofthelabcoat.

It is still possible to achieve the thrill of being able to say:“SometimesIgettofeelthatI’mtheonlypersonintheworldwhofullyunderstandsaparticularquestion.”(SeeChapter1.)

Thecareerinsciencecanstillleadustothepointofbeingabletosay:“IamthefirstevertodemonstrateXXX.”“IamthefirstevertoelucidatehowXXX happens.”WhattypeofXXXdoyouchoose?

Wherewouldyouwishthenewexplorationtoleadyou?Justreadon!

ColinWrigley,AM

xiii


Preface

Thisbookisintendedtopresentapictureofwhatisinvolvedinacareerinscientificresearch.Thetargetedreadersarethosewhoarealreadyengagedinaswellasthosewhoarecontemplatingacareerinscience.Itisalsohopedthatthisbookwillattractreadersfromthegeneralpublicandthosewhoinfluencepublicpolicy.Somesectionsof the book are provocative, and readers will no doubt disagreewithmanyoftheopinionsexpressed.Thisisthenatureofscience.Contrary opinions are welcome, and new and valuable insightscanoftenarisefromtheensuingdebate.Thisisingreatcontrasttosome other disciplines. In science, precedence counts for nothing.Everytheoryandinterpretationiscontinuallyquestionedandchal-lenged,regardlessofwhenitwasoriginallyputforward.Scientificunderstandingisadynamicprocessandalwayssubjecttochange.Theaimof research is todiscover the truthandadvancegenuineknowledge.Scientificresearchenrichesourcultureanddrives thetechnologythathasimprovedthelivingconditionsinwhichmanyhumanslive.Itisthereforeoneofthemostnobleprofessions.Scienceis universal. The pursuit of knowledge should not be affected bynationalboundaries.Thisisoneofthegreatattractionsofworkingasaresearcher.Itenablesformationoffriendshipswithcolleaguesinvariouspartsoftheworldandprovidesopportunitiesforinter-nationaltravelandforthenurturingofthesefriendships.

Thegreatestadvanceshavebeenmadebyscientistswhenthecon-ditionshaveallowedtheircreativitytoflourish.Scientificresearchisanexplorationintotheunknown.Thisisnotproperlyunderstoodbymanyofthosewhoareincharge.Asaresult,inrecentdecades,therehasbeenanincreasingencroachmentofbusinessmanagementprinciplesintothecontrolofresearch.Oneofthethemesinthebookis topointout theunsuitabilityofmanagerialprinciples todirectscience.TheargumentsareparticularlyemphasizedinChapter5.

Chapter2describesthequalificationsusuallyrequiredtobecomearesearcher.Chapter4proposessomeoftheattributesthatresearchscientistsneedtodeveloptohaveasuccessfulcareer.

Preface

xiv


Itriedtoincludeexamplesofmyownexperiencesasaresearcherto illustratesomeofthepoints. I feel that this, incertaincases, ispreferabletomoreabstractdiscussions.Thecareersofmanypeopleareinfluencedbychanceeventsthatoccurduringtheirlives.Inmycase,IhappenedtolistentoatalkbySirPeterMedowar,aNobelLaureate, in which he outlined the views of Sir Karl Popper, oneoftheforemostphilosophersofscience.Thismademerealizetheimportanceofacquiringanunderstandingofthescientificmethodforacareerinresearch.Thus,Chapter3hasbeendevotedtoadis-cussionofaspectsofthescientificmethod.Popperproposedseveralareas thatposeadanger toscientificprogress.Onewasa lackofmotivationforinquiry.Theperiodfromthe1950stothe1970s,wasapinnacleofexcitementinscienceasdescribedinChapter8.Manyscientificandtechnologicaladvancesweremadeduringthisperiod.Sincethen,therearesignsthatsomeofthisexcitementhasdeclined.Thisshowsupinthefallingenrollmentsinsciencecoursesandthedecrease in science’s share of high-achieving students, which hasbeenobservedinsomecountries.Hopefully,thiswillbeapassingphase. Itwillbeup to thosewho take up theprofession tobringaboutareturnofthisexcitement.Thereisnoreasonwhythisshouldnot be achieved. Great discoveries are there, waiting to be made.All that is needed are the conditions for scientific research to besuitable.Thecreationoftheseconditionswilldependonthosewholead.SomethoughtsaboutleadershipinscienceareputforwardinChapter6.We learnfromhistory,andit isvaluable toperuse thecareers of individual scientists whohave made an impact. A fewexamples of such scientists are discussed in Chapter 7, to helpgiveinsightintohowtheyarrivedattheirachievements.Thefinalchapter(Chapter 8)turnsattentiontotworelatedchallengesfacingtheadvanceofscientificresearch.Thefirst is theneedtofreesci-entistsfromtheconstraintsthatpreventthemfromrealizingtheirtruecreativity.Thesecond,whichisdirectlyrelatedtothefirst,con-cernstheneedtoachieveamorepleasantworkingenvironmentformany scientists.

I feel that it is important that scientistsdonot take themselvestooseriously,soattheendofsomeofthechapters,afewhumorousanecdotesareincluded.

xv


The Author

Finlay MacRitchie was a professor in the Department of GrainScience and Industry, Kansas State University from 1997 to 2009.He is presently Professor Emeritus in that department. Prior tothis, he was a research scientist in the Commonwealth ScientificandIndustrialResearchOrganization(CSIRO)ofAustralia.HehasspentshortperiodsoftimeasVisitingProfessorattheUniversityofChileandtheFederalUniversityofRiodeJaneiro,Brazil,andasSeniorResearchFellowattheAgriculturalUniversity,Wageningen,TheNetherlands;theUniversityofParisV;theUniversityofLund,Sweden;andtheUniversityofTuscia,Viterbo,Italy.

MacRitchiehaspublishedmorethan150papersinrefereedjour-nalsandtwotextbooks—Chemistry at Interfaces(AcademicPress,1990)andConcepts in Cereal Chemistry(Taylor&Francis,2010).HeislistedasanInstituteforScientificInformation(ISI)highlycitedresearcher.

HehasbeenamemberoftheeditorialboardsofAdvances in Colloid and Interface Science, Cereal Chemistry, and Journal of Cereal Science.Currently,heiseditor-in-chiefoftheJournal of Cereal Science.

MacRitchie’sawardsincludetheF.B.GuthrieMedaloftheCerealDivisionoftheRoyalAustralianChemicalInstitute(RACI)andtheThomasBurrOsborneMedalandGeorgeW.ScottBlairMemorialAward of the American Association of Cereal Chemists (nowAACCInternational).

1


Chapter 1Introduction

Motivation and Requisites for a Research Career

Manywhoembarkonacareerinscientificresearcharemotivatedbyacuriosityabouttheworldandadesiretotackleandsolveproblems.Thisisonethingthatcomesthroughclearlywhenresearchscientistsareinterviewed.InaU.S.PBS(PublicBroadcastingStation)televisionprogram,Cool Careers in Science(ScientificAmericanFrontiers),dis-cerningquestionswereposedtoanumberofnotablescientistsandengineers.Thetextcanbeaccessedonlineandshouldmakevaluablereadingforthosecontemplatingaresearchcareer.*Theseresearch-erswereaskedquestionsthatincludedwhytheydecidedtobecomeresearchscientists,whatacademicbackgroundisneeded,whattheydoduringa typicalworkday,what they likemostabout thework,andiftherewasanythingtheydonotlike.Therewasacertaincon-sistencyintheanswers,asmaybeexpected,andsomeofthepointsmadebytheintervieweeswillbediscussedthroughoutthisbook.There are many requisites for researchers, but I believe that therearethreethatareessentialifascientististohaveasuccessfulcareer.

Curiosity or a Spirit of InquiryThefirstistohaveacuriousorinquiringmind,asalreadynoted.Thisiswhatgivesapersontheincentiveandpersistencetopursuea problem, with the objective of gaining an understanding of itgreaterthanwhathasbeenheldpreviously.AsstatedbyMalcolmCohen, one of the Frontiers interviewees, “Sometimes I get tofeel that I’m theonlyperson in the worldwho fully understandsa particular question.”* This isa uniqueposition toattain. WhenAlbertEinsteinwasworkingonhisrelativityconcepts,itissaidthathebecamequiteillwhenherealizedtheenormousimpactofwhathehad discovered.

* PBS(PublicBroadcastingStation)(www.pbs.org/safarchive/5_cool/53_career.html),accessedJuly2010.

Scientific Research as a Career

2


Deep Knowledge of at Least One DisciplineThesecondrequirementisthattheresearchergainafullanddeepknowledgeof thediscipline that is involvedorpotentiallycanbeappliedtotheproblemsthatwillbetackled.Thisusuallymeansadeepunderstandingofabasic sciencesuchasphysics,chemistry,oneofthebiologicalsciences,orengineering.Formalcourseworkatuniversitiesmerelyprovidesaplatformfromwhichresearchersmustextendtheirknowledgebydedicationtothescientificliterature.Somegraduatestudiestrytoemphasizetheneedtodevelopbreadthofknowledge.Thismeanscoveringasmatteringofknowledgeinalarge number ofareas. The fear is that scientistswill become toospecializediftheyconcentrateononenarrowarea.However,fromthepointofviewofresearch,whatisrequiredisdepth,notbreadth,of knowledge. Research is about advancing new knowledge. It isillogicaltothinkthatsomeonecanadvancenewknowledgewithouthavingacquiredalevelofknowledgesimilartowhathasalreadybeenachievedinaparticulardiscipline.AlbertEinsteinreachedapointwherehehadtomastersomemathematicalprinciplesbeforehe could progresswithhiswork.This canhappen inotherareasof creative work,notonly science.Beethoven struggled tomastercounterpoint before he could use it in his music. The concernaboutspecialization,ofcourse,isvalid.This,however,maynotbea problem.Mostresearchers, if theyhaveacuriousmind,willbeinterested infieldsother than that inwhich theyarespecializingandwilltakestepstobecomeinformedaboutthem.

Intense Effort and Tapping into Infinite IntelligenceThe third important requirement is intense and sustained effort.Frontierintervieweesstressthatresearchisnotanine-to-fivejob.It isnoteasytocreatenewknowledge.Itrequiresarelentlesspittingoftheintellectagainsttheunknown.Whenscientistsapplyintenseeffortto trying to understand a problem, a stage is sometimes reachedwheretheyareableto tap intotheetheror infinite intelligence,auniversal limitless form ofknowledge that isaccessible topeoplewho learn how to capture it. This is a stage reached by creativeindividualssuchasthegreatcomposersorthosewhoactivelyuseprayer.It maybefamiliartothosewhohavereadthebookThink and Grow Rich, by Napoleon Hill (1960). When this occurs in science,a specialstatemaybereachedwherethemindbecomesreceptivetoideasandanswerstoquestionsthathavebeenposed.Ofcourse,

Introduction

3


a deepknowledgeoftherelevantdisciplineisneeded,asmentionedabove;otherwise,itwillnotbepossibleforworthwhileideastobereceivedandassimilated, justasseedsownonarid landwillnotpropagate. Scientists are usually not too interested in becomingwealthy,asdescribedbyHill,buttheprinciplesinvolvedinacquir-ing richesmaybesimilar to thoserequired for receivingcreativeideas.OneofthedangersinresearchwhichhasbeenenunciatedbysomeoftheFrontierintervieweesisthatofmaintainingabalancein life. According to Jim Cordes, “It is hard to find the right bal-ancebetweendoinga complete jobandremainingcompetitive inthefieldwhileachievingsatisfactioninotheraspectsoflife.”*Thisisachallengeandmustberesolvedbyeachresearcherindividually.

Early Interest and a Simple Research Problem

Myown interest in sciencearose inasimilarway tomanyof theFrontierinterviewees.Igrewuponafarmonwhichdairyingwasthemainactivity.Whenpasturewasfirstestablishedonthefarm,goodyieldsofqualityspecieswereobtained.However,astimewenton,deteriorationoccurred,andsomegrassspeciessuchassubterraneancloverdisappeared.Thefieldswherethiswasobservedwereusedforhaymaking—thatis,thepasturewasshutofffromgrazingdur-ingthegrowingseason(spring/summer)andthenharvestedforhaytofeedthestockduringtheperiodoflowpasturegrowth(winter).Anexplanationforthelossofqualitywasthechallenge.AtthesametimeasIwasthinkingabout theproblem,I begantoreadarticlesinagriculturaljournals.Myreadingwasprimarilyforinterest,butnevertheless,Ikepttheprobleminmind.Someideasemergedfrommyreading.Removalofgrassfromafieldwithoutreturningit(at leastpartially)byfeedingittoanimalsinthesamefieldcouldpotentiallyproduceatransferoffertility.Thatis,nutrientscouldbedrawnfromthesoiland,ifnotreturned,couldcauseadeficiencyofoneormoreoftheelementsneeded.Plantgrowthrequiresanumberofessentialelements,suchasnitrogen,phosphorus,potassium,andsulfur,andtraceelements,suchascopper,zinc,andmolybdenumtonamesomeof themainones. Anotherobservationmadeat the timewas that

* PBS(PublicBroadcastingStation)(www.pbs.org/safarchive/5_cool/53_career.html),accessedJuly2010.


4


wheretreelogshadbeenburnedinthefield,grasslaterappearedtogrowabundantly,includingclover.Ireadinanarticlethatthishadbeenobservedandthattheashfromtheburntwoodcontainedhighamountsofpotassium.Atentativehypothesisemergedthatthelossofpasturequalitywasduetoremovalofatleastoneimportantele-mentasaresultofrepeatedhaycropping.A subsidiaryhypothesiswasthatpotassiumcouldbetheculprit.Everyyear,thefieldsweretopdressedwithsuperphosphate,astandardprocedureatthattime.It was surmised that deficiency of phosphorus and sulfur (whichwascontainedinsuperphosphate)waslikelynotresponsibleforthepoorpasture.Infact, itseemedthatapplicationofsuperphosphatemaynothavebeencontributingtoimprovementandmaywellhavebeenawasteofmoneyandtime.

Anexperimentwasdesigned inwhichasmallpartof thefieldwasdividedintomeasuredplotsandeachplottreatedwithadiffer-entfertilizer,astandardprocedureusedbysoilscientiststotestele-mentaldeficiency.Thetreatmentsincludednone(control)andalltheessentialelementsthatwereknown.Atharvesttime,oneoftheplotsstoodoutfromalltherest.Theplottreatedwithpotassiumfertilizerproducedalushgrowthofpasture,whereasalltheothersappearedlittle different from the control. A more sound experiment wouldhaveinvolvedcuttingandweighingthegrassfromeachplot.Thiswashardlynecessary,sodramaticwastheresponseto potassium.Whenthemowerwasputthroughthisplot,itcontinuallystuckandhadtobestoppedandclearedeveryfewfeet.

Thisexampleofasimpleresearchprojecthasbeendescribedasit illustrates some points that I believe are important in scientificresearch.Itshowshowcuriosityisavitalingredient.Thecapacitytobechallengedbyaproblemandtobereadytopitone’sintellecttotryingtosolveitisparamount.Subsequently,theproblemsthatIhaveworkedonhavebeenmuchlessamenable,buttheprinciplesencounteredinthisfirstrelativelysimplisticproblemweresimilar.

Importance of Combining Study with Experimentation

Anotherpointthatneedstobestressedistheimportanceofcom-biningthinkingandreadingwithexperimentation.Somestudentsbegin their research career by carrying out a “literature search”

Introduction

5


prior to beginning their experimental work, very oftenunder themisguidedinstructionofasupervisor.Asaresult,thereislittleorno critical evaluation of the literature. There are little criteria fordistinguishingwhatisgoodscienceandrelevantfromwhatisnot.Too often,weseestudentsformmind-setsbasedoncertainthingsthatarereadoraretaughtbutmaynotbesoundorapplicabletotheproblembeingpursued.Ontheotherhand,whenstudentshavetheproblemorproblemsatthebackoftheirmindsandareengagedinexperimentalwork,theyaremorelikelytodevelopacriticalattitude.Theyaremoreable toseparatewhat isgoodscienceandrelevanttotheirresearchfromwhatisnotsoundandusefultothem.Theirreading,therefore,becomesmoredirectedandselective.Aliteraturesearchdoneinisolationisnotdirectedandresemblessettingoffonajourneywithouthavingaclearideaofthedesireddestination.

References

Hill,N.1960.Think and Grow Rich,FawcettCrest,NewYork.Public Broadcasting Station, PBS.org, Scientific American Frontiers

Archives,Fall1990–Spring2000,Cool Careers in Science(www.pbs.org/safarchive/5_cool/53_career.html),accessedJuly2010.

7


Chapter 2ScientificTrainingandPersonalDevelopment

Sixty years ago I knew everything; now I know nothing;educationisaprogressivediscoveryofourownignorance.*

WillDurant

University Qualifications

Inearliertimes,itwaspossibleforamateurstomakeusefulcontri-butionstoscience.Today,thisismuchmoredifficult,anduniversityqualificationsareusuallymandatoryforsomeonetobecomeaprac-ticingresearchscientist.Requisitesforuniversitydegreesinsciencevarybetweencountriesandevenbetweenuniversitiesinthesamecountry. The following remarks are therefore rather generic andlargelybasedonmyownexperience.

Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctoral Degrees

Thesequenceofqualificationsisfirstabachelor’sdegreefollowedby an honors or master’s degree, and ultimately a doctorate. Thefirstdegree(thebachelor’sdegreeinmanycountries,oritsequiva-lent), is usually a three- or four-year course. It may be longer foranengineeringdegree,butsciencedegreeswillbethemainfocushere.In thefirstyearofapuresciencedegree,studentswillchooseseveraldisciplinesforstudy.Inlateryears,thisnumberisreduced,and at least one (and perhaps two) is selected for specialization.It may be chemistry, physics, geology, botany, and so forth. Thisis called a major and is studied at increasingly advanced levelsthroughoutthedegree.Whentheygraduate,studentsshouldhave

* IWiseWisdomOn-Demand(www.iwise.com/Gwbjc),accessedJuly2010.


8


asoundknowledgeofthefundamentalsofthesciencechosenasamajor.Anhonorsdegreemaybetakeninthefinalyearofafour-yearsciencecourseforoutstandingstudentsorintheyearfollow-inggraduationwitha bachelor’sdegree. It willusually consistofcourseworkatanadvancedlevelplusashortresearchprojectthatwillbewrittenupasathesisordissertation.Themaster’sdegreefollowsandnormallyrequirestwoyearsofstudyafterabachelor’sdegree.Thedoctoraldegree(Ph.D.)isusuallycompletedinthreetofouryearsafterfinishinganhonorsoramaster’sdegree.

Research Ph.D. versus Combined Research and Course Work

In the transition from the bachelor’s degree to the postgraduatemaster’s and doctoral degrees, there is a fundamental divergenceof the requirements in different countries. In somecountries, suchasAustralia,NewZealand,theUnitedKingdom,andGermany,thePh.D.isapureresearchdegree.Thismeansthatthestudentpursuesaresearchproblemforseveralyears,culminatinginathesis.Thethesisis then sent out for examination by at least three experts of inter-nationalstandinginthefieldoftheresearch.Theoutcomeisdecidedby a panel from the student’s university based on the examiners’recommendations.Thestudentmayfail,beaskedtocarryoutaddi-tionalexperimentsandresubmit,revisecertainsectionsofthethesis,orsimplymakeeditorialcorrections.Thelasttworequirementsmayberelegatedtothestudent’ssupervisor toensuretheyarefulfilledbeforethedegreeisawarded.Thistypeofdoctoraldegreerequiresnocourseworkandthereforenowrittenororalexamination.

Insomeothercountries,includingtheUnitedStatesandCanada,thedegreerequiresinadditiontoaresearchprojectandthesis,sat-isfactorycompletionofaconsiderableamountofcourseworkwithitsaccompanyingexaminations.Priortobeingacceptedasacandi-dateforPh.D.,thestudentneedstopassaPh.D.preliminaryexami-nation.Thismaytakedifferentformsdependingontheuniversitydepartment. Itmaysimply consistofwrittenexaminations in thestudent’sareaofspecialization.Alternatively,itmayconsistofalit-eraturesurveyofatopicfollowedbypreparationofaresearchpro-posalappropriateforsubmissiontoafundingbody.Theliterature

Scientific Training and Personal Development

9


surveyandthefinalproposalareeachpresentedorallytothestu-dent’sgraduatecommittee.Thecommitteeusuallyconsistsoffourfacultymembers,includingthestudent’smajoradvisor,atleastonememberbeingfromanexternaldepartment.Aftersuccessfulcom-pletionofthePh.D.preliminaryexamination,thestudentisadmit-tedasacandidateforPh.D.andiseligibletopresentthePh.D.thesisafteracertainminimumtime(sometimeseightmonths)haselapsed.Aftercompletionofthethesis,thestudentpresentsadefenseoftheworkinpublictoanaudiencefollowedbyanoralexaminationofthethesisbythegraduatecommittee.

Fromtheperspectiveof training tobecomearesearchscientist,I considerthepureresearchdegreewithoutcourseworktobesupe-rior.Beginningattheageoffive,throughprimary,secondary,andtertiaryeducation,studentsareaskedtositinclassroomsandarefedinformation.Ithasbeensaidthatchildrenarealwaysgoingaroundasking questions but that society has an effective way of deal-ingwiththisproblem.Itiscallededucation!Bytheendofthefirst(bachelor’s) degree, a student should have acquired a sound basicknowledgeofatleastonescientificdiscipline.Furtherforce-feedingof information together with tedious assignments may only serveto erode the spirit of inquiry that is essential for research. Whengraduatestudentsbegintopursuearesearchproblem,itis impor-tantthattheybegivenacertainamountoffreedomtoconcentrateontheproblem.Thisentailsexperimentalworkwithsimultaneousself-studyand focused thinking.Theadvantageof this is that thebooksandarticleschosenforreadingwillberelevanttotheresearch,andthestudywillbemoreefficient.Muchofthecompulsorycoursework,ontheotherhand,maynotbeusefulandmaytendtoinstillmind-sets.Furthermore,withoutcoursework,thestudentwillmorereadilydevelopacriticalattitudetotheliterature.Whatisreadcanbecomparedwithwhatisfoundbyexperiment.It is importanttodistinguish between acquiring information and acquiring knowl-edge. Information is received and stored passively. Knowledge, inaddition, requires an active input from the individual. When theinformationiscriticallyevaluatedandconsideredtobesound,thenthisbecomesknowledge.Whenalotofinformationisdispersedincoursework,thereisagreatertendencytoacceptwhatistaught,andmindsmaybecomelesscritical.Theremaybeagreatertendencytoacceptandnottochallenge.Thiscanresultinregimentedthinkingratherthantheimaginativethinkingneededinscience.


10


Imaginative and Regimented Thinking

Regimented thinking can often be detected, for example, whenmanuscriptsarerefereedorwhenresearchproposalsarereviewed.Aresearchproposalmayberejectedbecausetheliteraturereviewwasincompleteortherewasinsufficientdetailaboutanexperimen-taltechnique,eventhoughtheprincipalinvestigatormayhavebeentheonewhodevelopedthe technique.Moreimaginative thinkerswouldgivegreatercredence toother criteria, suchas the solidityof thebasic science, the track recordsofmembersof the researchteam,andtheinnovativenessofanideaanditspotentialtoleadtofar-reachingconsequences.

Anotheraspect to comparebetweenapure research degreeandoneinvolvingcourseworkisthequalityoftheresearchcontent.Ifthetwotypesofdegreesrequireaboutthesametime,threetofouryears,thenlogicallythestudentwhoisfreeoftheburdenofcourseworkwillhavemoretimetodevotetoresearch.Goodresearchneedstimeforthinkingtomature,forcriticalexperimentstobedesignedandcarriedout,andforsoundconclusionstobereached.Ihavehearditsaidthatgraduate students should bemade to come into the laboratoryandwork inbetweenclasses.Mostresearch,however, requirescontinu-ity.Someexperimentstakelongtimes,orthetimeforanexperimentcannot always be predicted. It is important to distinguish betweengenuine research and the collecting of data to put into figuresandtables.Muchofwhatgoesunderthenameof“research”thesedaysissimplythelatter,andthatcancertainlybedoneinbetweenclasses.

Somemaysaythatmanygraduateswithmaster’sanddoctoraldegreesdonotgoontohavecareersinresearch.Thisistrue.Many,particularlythosewhojoinanindustrialcompany,proceedtoman-agementpositions.However,iftheyareinchargeofscientificandtechnicalstaff, it iscrucial that theyhavea soundunderstandingofscience.Thewaytounderstandscienceisthroughgainingsomeexperienceincarryingoutresearch.

The Ph.D. Preliminary Examination

TheothermaindifferencebetweenthetwotypesofPh.D.degrees(atleastinEnglish-speakingWesterncountries)isthatinthesystem


11


involvingcoursework,anoralexamisincluded,bothforthePh.D.preliminaryandthefinaldefense.Ihavenotbeenabletodiscovertheoriginof thePh.D.preliminaryexamination.Iwouldbesur-prisedifithadbeeninauguratedbyresearchscientists.Typically,thecompletionofonedegreequalifiesastudenttoproceedtothenexthigherdegree.Abachelor’sdegreewithhonorsoramaster’sdegreemightbeexpectedtoqualifyastudentforadmissiontoaPh.D. degree. This is provided that a student has demonstratedinhisorher theses for thesedegrees, thecapacity tocarryoutagood research project and to present the work in a dissertation.The Ph.D. preliminary examination, in many cases, seems to beanother obstacle together with course work to prevent a studentfrom carrying out a research project of some depth. Some mayarguethatastudentwholatertakesapositioninauniversitysci-encedepartmentwillbeexpectedtoapplyforcompetitivefundingtodeveloparesearchprogram.Thus,thepreparationofaresearchproposal as required in some Ph.D. preliminaries is valuable.It might be questioned, however, if a student at an intermediatestageofadoctoraldegreehasthebackgroundrequiredtodeviseaworthwhileresearchproject.Onceastudenthasacquiredsoundknowledge in his or her area, as should happen toward the endof the student’s doctoral degree and in their postdoctoral years,itmightbemoreusefulforthestudenttoattendtrainingcoursesinthepreparationofgrantproposals.Suchcoursesareavailable,sometimesprovidedbyfundingbodies. Ihavealsoheard itsaidthat,inaPh.D.preliminary,astudentcanbeassessedonhisorherabilitytodemonstratecreativity.Creativityisaterm,however,thatshouldbereservedfortrue innovativecontributionsto thinking.It isanattributethatIsuspectmightbeexpectedtobedevelopedfromtowardthecompletionofadoctoraldegreeonward.Thinkingup wild ideas based on ad hoc premises is not what should bethoughtofasbeingcreative.

Research versus Collecting Data

Returning to the obstacles put in the way of students, there is adangerinshorteningthetimeavailablefordedicationtothemainresearchthatstudentsmaynotfullyappreciatewhatisrequiredforgenuineresearch.IhavetheimpressionthatsomePh.D.graduates


12


believethatresearchconsistsmerelyofcollectingdatatoput intotablesandfigures.Researchismuchmore.Itsaimistodiscovernewandusefulknowledge.Ifnewnessweretheonlyaim,thenwecouldimagineaprojectwheremeasurementsofthedimensionsofalltheroomsinthebuildingcouldbemade.Laserequipmentcouldbeusedtomakemeasurementstothenearestmicrometer.Experimentally,itwouldbegoodscience.Statisticscouldbeusedtoestimatestan-darddeviationsandtocalculatecorrelationsbetweenthedifferentmeasurements.Thiswouldbeinformationnotpreviouslyknown,butwoulditbeuseful?Thisexampleseemsratherabsurd,butmanystudiesthatgounderthenamesof“researchprojects”arenotmuchbetterintermsofdiscoveringusefulknowledge.

Oral and Written Examinations

An examination based on oral questioning rather than only ontheevaluationofawritten thesis canbe contentious.Admittedly,it allowsthestudenttobequizzedonthespotandgivesaneasierwayforexaminerstoclarifyissues.However,itintroducesavari-able—the personalities of the students as well as the examiners.I haveseenstudentschokeupwhenconfrontedbyseveralaggres-siveprofessors,whileotherstudentshavebeengivenaneasyrideby sympathetic questioners even though the research presentedmaybemediocre.Ihavehearditsaidthattheoralexaminationteststhecapacityofstudentstothinkontheirfeet.Butisitimportantforscientists tobeable to thinkon their feet?Certainly it isanassetwhen presenting a research proposal to a committee or debatingpointsatascientificconference.However,thinkingonyourfeetisnotanessentialrequirementforascientistasitundoubtedlyisforalawyerorapolitician.Scientificresearchismoreaboutreflectivethinkingthatrequirestimeandrarelydependsonquickjudgmentsonthespot.

Limitations of Statistics

Sometimes,whenIaskastudenttodayhowtheirresultsarecomingalong,Imaygetananswersuchas,“Ihaven’tlookedatthemyet.I still have a few more results to get. When I finish these, I will


13


starttolookoverthem.”Thisapproachistotallywrong.IrecallthatwhenIwasaresearchstudent,someofmyfellowstudentswouldcome into the laboratory and plan their experiments for the dayor for thenext fewdaysormore.Theplannedexperimentswerebasedonexpectationsofhowtheresultswouldturnout,inotherwords,onahypothesis.Theywereexcitedandcouldnotwait tosee whether the results confirmed their expectations. More oftenthannot,theydidnot,sotheyhadtogobacktothedrawingboardandthinkafreshabouthowtheywouldcontinue.ThetwodifferentapproachesIdescribedessentiallyillustratethedifferencebetweenthe inductive method and the hypothesis-deduction procedurethat will be described in the next chapter. Those who simply setout to collect data will not have a clear focus, and the work willusuallybepedestrian.Whentheyhavecompiledallthedata,theymaynotevenlookatthenumbersbutwillapplyastatisticalpack-age to determine whether the correlations they obtain betweendifferentvariablesaresignificant.Ifthestatisticalprogramshowsthemtonotbesignificantatacertainlevel,theywillverylikelynotpursuetherelationships.Theymayaccepttheverdictofstatistics.However,insomecases,iftheyhadlookedmorecloselyatthedata,theymayhavenoticedsome trends that, if theyhad investigatedfurther,mayhavegiveninsightsintowhatwasreallyhappening.Toomanystudentsthesedaysareslavesofstatistics.Itshouldbesaidthatstatisticianscangiveimportantadvicetostudentstoplantheir experiments and often give generously of their time to dothis.However,theyareusuallynotresearchscientists,sostudentsshouldnotfollowstatisticsblindly.Itshouldalsoberememberedthatmostofthegreatdiscoveriesinsciencehavebeenmadewith-outtheapplicationofstatistics.

Accuracy: Are the Results What Are Intended to Be Measured?

Another problem with the more inductive method relates to thequestionofaccuracy.Itisessentialthatthemeasurementsonemakesare truly whatone is trying tomeasure.Often, it can be that themeasurementsrecordedarenotwhatareintendedtobemeasured.Thiscanoccuriftherearedefects intheexperimentalprocedure.


14


Sometimes,theexperimentalerrormaybegreaterthanthetruedif-ferencesoneisattemptingtoshow.Alternatively,itmaybethattheprocedureusedissimplynotsufficientlysophisticatedtobecapableof making the measurement or that certain variables are not rec-ognized or are ignored. This is where the experimenter needs tobeperceptiveandbeable to recognize that thereareflaws in themethods.Asaresult,thesefirstmeasurementsneedtobescrapped,andflawshavetobecorrected.Itmaymeanthatanumberofinitialmeasurementshavetoberejected.Somewillsaythatyoushouldneverdiscardmeasurements.Thisisnottrue.Iftheexperimental-istrealizesthattheyarenotaccurate,theymustbedismissedandthe procedure fine-tuned until confidence is gained that they areauthentic.Itrequiresbeingalertandobservantwhilecarryingouttheexperimenttodetectanypartoftheprocedurethatmayneedtobealtered.Thus,beforethescientisthasconfidencethatthemea-surementsarewhataretryingtobemeasured,aprogressiverefine-mentofthetechniquemayneedtobeperformed.Thisattributeofbeingabletorecognizewhenmeasurementsarenotaccurateandtofindwaysofovercomingflaws in the technique isanessentialoneforresearchscientiststoacquire.Thosewhodonothavethisattributemayacceptthefirstresultstheyobtainwhichmaywellbeinaccurate.Manyofthemorecomplexinstrumentsusedinsciencetoday are “blackboxes,” and this sometimes makes itmore diffi-culttoassesswhetherthemeasurementsobtainedarereallywhatscientistsbelievetheyaremeasuring.Inearliertimes,researchstu-dentswereoftenexpectedtoconstructtheirownequipment.Thisledtoagreaterunderstandingofhowitworkedanditslimitations.Techniciansmaywelldevelopgreater skills inusing instrumentsthan the research scientists who direct the work. However, it islikelythattheresearchscientistswillbemoreconsciousoftheneedforaccuracy.Theywillgo togreaterpains todiscovererrorsandtoeliminatethem,whereastechniciansmayproceedaccordingtotheprescribedmethodandmayfailtodetectwhenerrorscreepin.Howdoesoneknowifthemeasurementsbeingmadeareaccurate?Thereisnosimpleanswer.Theprocessofdetectingandeliminat-ingerrorsintheexperimentalprocedureisonewayofapproachingtruevalues.Anotherwayistouseatleastoneotherexperimentalapproach.Iftwoindependentprocedurespointtothesameresult,thescientistcanhavesomeconfidencethattheresultisaccuratebut,ofcourse,canneverbecertain.Anotherparameterbesidesaccuracy


15


(howclosethemeasuredvaluesaretothetruevalues)isthepreci-sion(repeatability).Itisimportanttobeabletorepeatthemeasure-ments(replicates)andobtaincloselysimilarvalues.However,somefall into the trapofassociatinggoodrepeatabilitywithreliability,withoutestablishingthatthemeasurementsareaccurate.

Where To after Graduation?

Foracareerinscientificresearch,adegreeequivalenttoamaster’soraPh.D.isusuallyessential.Thetimespentasaresearchstudentand the years immediately following completion of the researchdegreeistheformativestageofasuccessfulresearchcareer.Thereis some excellent literature dealing with the pursuit of a researchcareer.Ratherthanriskingrepetitionofmuchofwhathasbeenwrit-ten,Iwillreferthereadertosomeofwhatisavailableandrestrictmyremarkstosomepersonalobservations.Building a Successful Career in Scientific Research: A Guide for Ph.D. Students and Postdocs (Dee, 2006)is a treatise that comprehensively covers the field. Donald Braben(1994)haswrittena fascinatingbook,To Be a Scientist: The Spirit of Adventure in Science and Technology,basedonhisexperience in theencouragement of innovative science. One Hundred Reasons to Be a Scientist(AbdusSalamInternationalCentreforTheoreticalPhysics,2004)includescontributionsfrommanyscientistsandshouldmakestimulatingreadingforthoseinvolvedinresearch.Moving On in Your Career: A Guide for Academic Researchers and Postgraduates (Ali andGraham,2000)providesvaluableadviceonhowtoenhancecareerprospects in academic research or lecturing. Planning a Scientific Career in Industry (Mohanty and Ghosh, 2010) is directed to thoseseeking to work in industry. Other books that are recommendedreadingaretwobyDonaldBraben,Pioneering Research: A Risk Worth Taking (2004) and Scientific Freedom: The Elixir of Civilization (2008).ThesetwobooksarediscussedfurtherinChapter8.

Main Areas for Employment of Science Graduates

Beforefinishingtheiruniversitystudies,studentsneedtobethink-ingabout their futureemploymentoptions.Advisorscanoftenbehelpfulingivingdirection,astheyhaveusuallydevelopedrelevant


16


personalcontacts.Therearethreemainavenuesforresearchscien-tiststofollow.Theseareuniversitysciencedepartments,governmentresearchagencies,andcommercial companiesengaged in researchanddevelopment.Universitysciencedepartmentshavefacultymem-berswhoseduties, inaddition to teaching,areexpected to includedevelopmentofresearchprograms.Researchscientistsatuniversitieshavethegreatestfreedomtochooseanddeveloptheirowndirectionsintheirfieldofexpertise.Nextintermsofflexibilityaregovernmentresearch organizations dedicated to solving problems of nationalinterestandmayincludebasicaswellasappliedresearch.Examplesof national research organizations are the CNRS (National Centrefor Scientific Research) of France and the CNR (National ResearchCouncil)ofItaly.GermanyhastheMaxPlanckInstitutes,Australiathe CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial ResearchOrganization) and New Zealand the Crown Research Institutes.TheUnitedStateshasmanynationalinstitutessuchastheNationalInstitutesofHealth(NIH).Manycountrieshaveresearch institutesundertheiracademiesofscience,suchasisthecaseinChina.

Thoseemployedbycommercialcompaniesareexpectedtofocuson the company’s objectives that are normally to create new orimprovedproductsorprocesses.Ifagraduatechoosestowork inoneof these threemajorareas, thisdoesnotmean thatheor sheneeds to be restricted to that area indefinitely. There is scope formobility between the areas. In fact, someone contemplating anacademiccareercanobtainvaluableexperiencebyinitiallyworkinginindustry.Theknowledgeofhowindustryworks,whichisdiffer-entthanacademia,andthecontactsdevelopedwillbeagreatassetwhenitcomestoinitiatingmeaningfulresearchandseekingfund-ingtosupportit.Conversely,industrycangainbytakingpersonnelfromacademiawhomayintroduceamorefundamentalapproachtotacklingproblems.

Internships as a Precursor to Employment

Internships are a way that students can gain valuable experienceinascientificworkplaceandhelpthemtomakechoicesabouttheirfuture. They are offered byboth academic and industrial organi-zations. Students need to research the opportunities that exist.Frequently, companies may send representatives to university


17


departmentstorecruitpotentialinternees.Therepresentativeswillgivetalkstodescribethetypeofworkdoneintheircompanyandgivefeedbacktoinquiries.Studentscanrequestinterviewsinwhichthey can put forward their credentials. Internships are offered atboth undergraduate and graduate levels. For graduates, the com-pany representatives evaluate students based on their academicperformanceuptothattime,theircommunicationskills,andtheirrecordofparticipationinactivitiesatstudent,university,andevennationalandinternationallevels.Withthatinmind,studentsneedtopreparefortheseinterviewssoastoportraythemselvesinthebestlighttoenhancetheirchancestobeofferedinternships.Iftheyareofferedinternships,whichareusuallyforadurationofthreetosixmonths,theythenhavetoconvincetheirsupervisorstograntper-missiontoaccept.Somesupervisorsarenotsupportiveofstudentstakingtimeofffromresearchprojectstoworkonsomethingquitedifferent. This is understandable as they have invested time andfunding for the research. The break in continuity of the researchcansometimescausestudentsto losetheirmomentumandwastetime in refocusing on their project. Despite this, internships areusuallypositiveforstudents’careers.Inthecaseofaninternshipinindustry,itallowsstudentstoexperiencetheworkingenvironmentinascientificorganization. If the internship is inanotheruniver-sitydepartment,possibly inanother country, studentsareable toextendtheirexpertiseandacquirefreshwaysofthinking,differentfromtheirhomedepartment.Theopportunitytobeexposedtoandstimulatedbydifferentmodesof thinking isanassetforacareerinresearch.Manycompaniesuseinternshipstorecruitpromisinggraduates.Sometimes,theprospectiveemployer,onceheorshehasselectedsomeone,putspressureonthestudenttojointhecompanyquicklyandtocommenceworkbyacertaindate.Thiscanbeunfairto thebest interestsof thestudentandtheuniversitydepartmentandcanjeopardizethequalityofthestudent’sfinalresearch.

Networking, Joining Associations, Conference Presentations

Thescientificcommunityisacloselyknitfraternity.Itisvaluableforscientiststoestablishcontactwithcolleagueswhoworkintheirarea


18


ofexpertise.Thereareopportunities todothis throughmeetingsandconferencesatlocal,national,andinternationallevels.Itisalsovaluabletocorrespondwiththesecolleagues,andthiscannowbedoneeasilythroughe-mail.Thosewhoaimtoadvancetheircareersshould join professional associations that represent their area ofresearchandbewillingtoserveontheircommittees.Theyshouldalso try to attend and make presentations at conferences. Whentraveling to attend conferences, opportunities should be taken tovisitcolleaguesattheirinstitutionsinordertoholddiscussionsandobserve the facilities being used. The formation of strong bondswithfellowscientistsaroundtheworldisoneofthemostreward-ingaspectsofacareerinresearch.Insomecases,itmaybeneces-sarytopersonallysubsidizethetravel.Thisshouldbeconsideredasaninvestmentinscientists’careers.Ifpossible,theyshouldgiveanoralpresentation.Thisisconsideredtohavemoreprestigethanaposterpresentationandgivestheindividualmorevisibility.Itisavaluablewayofadvertisingtheirresearchandbecomingknownamongtheirpeers.However,posterpresentationsarealsovaluable.Copiesofthepostershouldbeattachedtoposterboardssothatany-onewho is interested inthe topiccan takeacopyawayandreaditattheirleisure.Asthecopyhasthecontactdetailsoftheauthor(or authors),itfacilitatesinterchangeofinformation.Ifnocopiesaresupplied,posterboardsusuallyhaveenvelopesforvisitorstoleavetheirbusinesscardstoindicatethattheywouldliketohavecopiesofthepostersenttothem.

When giving an oral presentation, it is important to present asimple message. A common mistake of presenters is to show toomanyslidesandtrytocraminasmuchinformationaspossible.Thiscanbeaturn-offfortheaudience.Itneedstoberealizedthattheworkpresentedwilllikelybeunfamiliartomanyintheaudience.Therefore, it is important to present it in a way that will make itinterestingandeasilyunderstood.Agooddealofthoughtneedstobeputintotheorganizationofthepresentationsoastoachievethisaim.Itisnotnecessarytoprovidethelevelofexperimentaldetailthatisrequiredforapublishedpaper.Theinformationontheslidesshouldbeconcise,andinthecaseoftext,itmaybebesttolimitittooneorafewbulletsthatserveastalkingpoints.Theaudiencedoesnothavetimetoreadalotoftext,andiftheydohaveto,thistakestheirattentionawayfromwhatisbeingsaid.Itisvitalthatthepre-sentationbecompletedinthetimeallocatedandthattimeisallowed


19


forquestionsandcommentsfromtheaudience.Toachievethis,thetalk needs to be rehearsed and adjusted, if necessary, to complywiththetimelimit.Theanswerstoquestionsshouldbeconcise,andifunabletoansweraquestion,itisbettertoadmitthisthantotrytowaffle.Ifaskedtochairasessionataconference,it isimportanttobecomeasfamiliaraspossiblewiththeworktobecoveredinthesession.Shouldtherebenoquestionsattheendofatalk,itistheobligationofthechairtoaskapertinentquestionortoencouragesomediscussion.Itisdemoralizingforapresentertobemetwithsilenceaftergivingatalk.Whenpreparingatalk,presentersshouldtrytoputthemselvesinthepositionofamemberoftheaudienceforwhomthetopicmaybenew.Thetalkshouldbestructuredsothatthemessageflowslogicallyandthepointsmadeineachslideareeasilyassimilated.Helpfuladvice forgiving presentationscanbefoundinScientists Must Speak(Walters,D.E.andWalters,G.C,2010).

References

Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics. 2004. One Hundred Reasons to Be a Scientist,Trieste,Italy.

Ali,L.,andGraham,B.2000.Moving On in Your Career: A Guide for Academic Researchers and Postgraduates,Routledge,NewYork.

Braben,D.W.1994.To Be a Scientist: The Spirit of Adventure in Science and Technology,OxfordUniversityPress,NewYork.

Braben,D.W.2004.Pioneering Research: A Risk Worth Taking,JohnWiley&Sons,Hoboken,NewJersey.

Braben,D.W.2008.Scientific Freedom: The Elixir of Civilization,JohnWiley&Sons,Hoboken,NewJersey.

Dee,P.2006.Building a Successful Career in Scientific Research: A Guide for Ph.D. Students and Postdocs,CambridgeUniversityPress,NewYork.

Mohanty, S., and Ghosh, R. 2010. Planning a Scientific Career in Industry: Strategies for Graduates and Academics, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons,Hoboken,NewJersey.

Walters, D.E., and Walters, G.C. 2010. Scientists Must Speak, 2nd ed.,Routledge,London.


20


ON HOW TO SHOW THE SPIRIT OF SCIENTIFIC ENTERPRISE(ORIGINALLYPUBLISHEDINPUNCH)

There are threeprincipal groups of spurious scientific activ-ity, which come under the heading Bandwagon, No StoneUnturned,andFancyThat.TakeChigwell,forinstance,cozilyinstalledinawell-equippedlaboratoryatOxbridgeUniversity,but without an idea in his head. He reads in an obscureItalian journal thatFettuchiniofBolognahas isolatedanewanti-cancer principle from an extract of alfalfa. He immedi-atelysetshiswholeorganizationtoworkonthesamesubject,repeating the original experiment over and over again withcertainmodifications.

Withinayearhehasawholeseriesofpublicationsreadyonthesamesubjectandhebeginstofirethemlikebuckshotallovertheworld.Theeditorsofthescientificjournalsfindthem-selvesinaquandary.Chigwell’sworkistedious,repetitiveandunoriginal,butthesubjectonwhichheisworkingissoimpor-tantthatitishardtoturndownanythingremotelyconnectedwithit.Sotheytakethelineofleastresistance.

Asaresultofthis,Chigwellsoonendsupwithmorepub-licationsthanthemanwhomadetheoriginaldiscovery.Hisnamebeginstodominatetheliterature.Inanyreviewofthesubjecthemustbementioned.Ifthereistobeaninternationaldiscussionhemustbe invited.He isafterall, inmanywaysbettervaluethanFettuchini.

HespeaksEnglish,heisanamusingorator,hehasaknackfor explaining technicalities in simple language—and he isalwaysavailable.Verysoonpeople forget themeagernatureofhiscontribution.“Chigwell!”theysay.“Yes,ofcourse—theCancerman.Abrilliantfellow.”Fromthatmomentonwardshehasnothingtoworryabout.Hecandigawayhappilyatthesameholefortherestofhislife.

No Stone Unturned is a much less ambitious game thanBandwagon. It is thought tohavebeen takenoveroriginallyfromscholarsinthehumanities,whohavemademosteffec-tive use of it to maintain themselves in subsidized idlenessoverthecenturies.

21


NoStoneUnturnedrestsontheassumptionthatnopieceofknowledgenomatterhowapparentlyboringoruseless,istoosmall todemanda lifetime’s investigation. Indeed incertainacademiccircles,where thestudyof large issues is regardedas showyand journalistic, triviality in itselfmayholdacer-taincachet.Abiologistwhodedicatedhisworkinglifetothestudyofvariationsinthebiliarypassagesofthecodfishcarriesthesameauraofscholarshipasahistorianwhohasimmersedhimselfinthelesser-knowntextsoftheVenerableBede.

Theothergreatresearchgame,FancyThat,isanextensionofNoStoneUnturnedintothemoremodernscienceofpsychol-ogyandsociology.FancyThatconsistsessentiallyofaseriesof elaborate and time-consuming investigations designed togiveirrefutablescientificprooftoacliché.Thepracticeofthisgameonawidescalehasfilledtheworldofscientificliteraturewithpapersdesignedtoshowonceandforall, thatanimalslearnmorequickly ifproperly fedor thathumanbeingsaredistractedbyloudnoises.

Anothergroupofgamesisconnectedwithpublication.Theobjectofallpublicationgamesistogainthemaximumcreditfromtheminimumofusefulwork.Anexpertplayercanmakealittleresearchgoaverylongwayindeed.

Theoriginalpublishedpaper ismerelyabeginning.Afterthis it is possible to deliver the same results assembled in aslightlydifferentway,atavarietyofmeetingsanddiscussions,allofwhichareinduecourseprintedandaddinamostgrati-fyingwaytotheauthor’sbibliography.Letterscanbewrittentolearnedjournals,callingattentiontominoradditionstothework, and ultimately review articles covering the subject inquestionwithparticularreferencetothewriter’sownwork.

Specific games, the names of which are more or lessself-explanatoryarePriority,inwhichhalf-digestedexperimen-talworkispublishedinletterformsoastoestablishaleadingpositioninthefield,andChasingtheGrant,inwhichsimilarpublicationismadewiththeobjectofpressuringsomeorgani-zationintofinancingfurtherwork.

LinkedwithpublicationgamesisthegreattravelinggameSymposium.Thishasthemeritofwastingnotonlytimebut


22


moneyalso.Symposiumisaseasonalgame.Everyyearinthespringandautumn,thegreatscientificmigrationsbegin.

The scientists canbe seen likeaflockofbirds settlingonViennaorTokyoorSanFrancisco,sometimesinsmallgroups,sometimesinenormouscloudsofseveralthousandatatime.Theirshrillcriescanbeheardreverberatingthroughmeetinghallsandhotel lounges.Whataretheydoingthere?Nobodyreallyknows.Certainlynonewscientific informationisevergivenoutattheseinternationalmeetings.Thepapersreadatthe formal proceedings are never anything more than shortsummariesofpreviouslypublishedwork.Indeed,it hasbeensuggested that the only reason papers are read is to satisfydonorsoftravelgrantsandincometaxauthorities.

With any kindof luck, a conscientious scientist can retirefromallusefulworkaroundtheageof40andstillconvincehimselfthatheisleadingabusyandusefullife.

Indeed, ifhewishes formaterial successhe’dprobablybebetter advised to do so than to devote himself to the verychancybusinessofexperimentation.Hewillsoonfindoutthatnomancanservetwomasters.Beinganimportantscientificfigureisanoccupationinitself.Itleaveslittletimeforplayingaboutinthelaboratory.

Considerforinstance,ouroldfriendChigwellattheclimaxof his career.Now LordChigwell OM. FRS, syrupy ofvoiceandportlyofphysique,hestepsfromthedoorofhisBelgraviahouse into his chauffeur-driven Rolls. He has a heavy dayin front of him. A committee at the Ministry of Technologyaboutthepeacefulusesofatomicenergy,aboardmeetingatInternationalChemicals,thenafterlunchhehastogivealec-tureattheRoyalSocietyofArtsontheimportanceofpopula-tioncontrol. In theevening,dinnerwithLadyPamelaBerryandaquickappearanceontheFrostProgramme.

Hecastshismindbackwithnostalgiatothegoodolddaysinthelab,whenhe(with,ofcoursesomehelpfromFettuchini)finallycrackedtheproblemofthealfalfaprinciple.Thatwasareallybasicpieceofwork,notthekindofhalf-bakedrubbishtheyoungchapsareplayingaboutwithnow.Ah,hethinkssadlytohimself,theydon’tdoworklikethatanymore…I’msorrytohavetotellhim … theydo!

23


Chapter 3TheScientificMethod

Foracareerinscientificresearch,itisimportanttoacquireanunder-standingofwhatconstitutes the scientificmethod.Unfortunately,manyscientistsdevotelittletimetothinkingaboutthephilosophyof science, and even in science courses at many universities, thesubject isnotgivenhighprominence.Ofcourse, there isno rigidformula for what constitutes the scientific method, and how it isappliedwill vary in response to thenatureof the research beingundertaken.Nevertheless, therearecertainprinciples thatgovernhowaproblemshouldbetackledscientifically.

The Scientific Method, Empiricism, Induction

Whatismeantbythescientificmethod?Inearliertimes,onefavoredanswerwasthatscienceisdistinguishedbyitsempiricalnature(thatis,itisbasedonobservationandmeasurement).However,astrologyisbasedonmeasurementsofthepositionsofheavenlybodiesbutis not seriously regarded as a science, more as a pseudoscience.Anotherideathatenjoyedpopularityintheearly20th centurywasthatinductionwasthemethodofscience.Putsimplistically,induc-tionentailsgatheringaseriesofobservationsandthenanalyzingthemtoarriveatageneralization.

Karl Popper: Analysis of Early 20th Century Theories

PerhapsthegreatestinsightintothescientificmethodwasdevelopedbySirKarlPopperwhosemain contributionsare summarized intwobooks:The Logic of Scientific Discovery(1959)andConjectures and Refutations(1992).PoppergrewupinAustriaandwasinfluencedbytheintellectualenvironmentthereduringtheperiodjustfollowing


24


WorldWarI.Hewaschallengedbytheproblemofwhatconstitutesthescientificmethodor,morespecifically,whatisthecriterionthatdistinguishesascientifictheoryfromnonscienceorpseudoscience.At the time, several theories were being widely discussed. Theseincluded the theory of Adler on “individual psychology,” Freud’spsychoanalysis, Marx’s theory of history, and Einstein’s relativity.WhatstruckPopperaboutthepsychologicaltheoriesofAdlerandFreudwastheirapparentexplanatorypower.Thereseemedtobenoinstancesofbehaviorthatcouldnotbeexplainedbythesetheories.Everyeventcouldberationalizedasa“verification.”ThisledPoppertosuspectthatthisapparentcapacitytoexplaineverything,ratherthan being a strength, as their adherents claimed, could be theirweakness.InthecaseofEinstein’stheory,itwasquitedifferent.

Oneof thepredictionsof the theoryofrelativitywasthat lightshouldbesubjectedtogravitation.Totestthisprediction,expedi-tionsweresentoutin1919tomeasuretheapparentpositionsofdis-tantstarswhentheirlightpassedclosetoaheavyobject(the sun)during a total eclipse and compare them with their normal posi-tions in thenightskywhentheir lightdidnotpassnear thesun.Themeasurementsconfirmedthatthelightwasdeflected,andthemagnitudeofthedeflectionwasconsistentwithwhatwaspredictedfromthetheory.WhatwasremarkableaboutEinstein’stheorywasits vulnerability. The results of the eclipse measurements wouldnothavebeenexpectedonapriorigrounds,andiftheyhadbeendifferent,forexample,evenifthelighthadbeendeflectedbutnotbytherightmagnitude,thetheorywouldhavebeenrefuted.ThisledPopper to conclude that the criterionofa scientific theory isthat it must be refutable (or falsifiable). Using this criterion, thepsychological theories of Adler and Freud failed, because noexperiment could be conceived that could refute them. This didnotmeanthatAdlerandFreudwerenotseeingmanythingscor-rectly, simply that their theories did not qualify as scientific. Inthe case of the theoryof Marx, the original theorywas testable,butPopperassertedthatithadbeentestedandrefuted.However,in order to preserve it, its adherents had reinterpreted both thetheoryandtheevidenceinordertomakethemagree.Inthisway,theymadethetheoryirrefutableandthusdestroyeditsscientificstatus.InthecaseofEinstein’stheory,itwastestableandrefutableasshownbythe1919experiment.

The Scientific Method

25


Demarcation: A Criterion to Distinguish between Science and Nonscience

Popper’sobjectivewasnottohaveacriteriontodecidewhetheratheory(orhypothesis)wastrueorfalsebuttodistinguishbetweenscienceandnonscience(orpseudoscience).Hereferredtotheprob-lem of drawing a line between science and pseudoscience as the“problemofdemarcation.”Thecriterionofrefutabilitywasthusthesolutiontotheproblemofdemarcation.

Poppersummarizedhisconclusionsasfollows:

Itiseasytoobtainconfirmations,orverifications,fornearlyeverytheory—ifwelookforconfirmations.

Confirmations should count only if they are the result ofriskypredictions;that is tosay, if,unenlightenedbythethe-ory in question, we should have expected an event whichwasincompatiblewiththetheory—aneventthatwouldhaverefutedthetheory.

Every“good”scientifictheoryisaprohibition;itforbidscer-tainthingstohappen.Themoreatheoryforbids,thebetteritis.

Atheorywhichisnotrefutablebyanyconceivableeventisnon-scientific.Irrefutabilityisnotavirtueofatheory(assomepeopleoftenthink)butavice.

Everygenuinetestofatheoryisanattempttofalsifyit,ortorefuteit.Testabilityisfalsifiability,buttherearedegreesoftestability; some theoriesaremore testable,moreexposed torefutation,thanothers;theytake,asitwere,greaterrisks.

Confirmingevidenceshouldnotcountexceptwhenitistheresultofagenuinetestofthetheory;andthismeansthatitcanbepresentedasaseriousbutunsuccessfulattempttofalsifythetheory.(Inowspeakinsuchcasesof“corroboratingevidence”).

Somegenuinelytestabletheories,whenfoundtobefalse,arestillheldbytheiradmirers—forexamplebyintroducingsomeauxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theory ad hocin sucha way that it escapes refutation.Such aprocedure isalwayspossible,butitrescuesthetheoryfromrefutationonlyat the price of destroying, or at least, lowering its scientificstatus.(Popper,1992,pp.36–37)

With this insight, Popper rejected induction as a valid scientificmethod.Scientificknowledgeproceededfromtheorytoobservation,


26


not from observation to theory as the proponents of inductionasserted. Instead of waiting for regularities to appear, scientistsactivelytrytoimposeregularitiesonnature.Thisleadstocriticaltests (i.e., observations that are not arbitrary but are undertakenwiththeintentionoftestingahypothesisbyobtaining,ifpossible,a refutation). It isunlikely thatanyonewouldhavecomparedtheapparentpositionsofstarsduringaneclipseofthesunwiththeirnormalpositionsifthetheoryofrelativityhadnotbeenconceived.Ofcourse,naturefrequentlyresiststheimpositionofaconceptualview,andthehypothesisthatfollowsfromitisrefuted.Inscience,it isimportanttorealizethatatheorycanbeshowntobefalseifexperi-mental results fail to agree with what was predicted. Conversely,however, it can never be shown that a theory is true beyond anydoubt.Iftheresultsofexperimentsfailtorefuteatheory,allthatcanbesaidisthatthetheoryhasbeencorroboratedandmayprovision-allybeheldtobecorrect.

Myths as Precursors of Scientific Hypotheses

I have used the words theory and hypothesis interchangeably untilnow,butitisusualtodistinguishbetweenthem.Ahypothesisisapossibleinterpretationofexperimentalobservationsandisnormallyused toguess (calledaconjecture byPopper)at ageneral explana-tionthatcanthenbetestedbyfurtherexperiment.Theoryisatermreservedtodescribeaninterpretationthathasreceivedagooddealof acceptance. It may have evolved from a hypothesis (or hypoth-eses)thathasbeentestedandcorroborated.Ofcourse,a hypothesiscannotbecreatedoutofnothing.Theremusthavebeenobservationsandpreviousthinkingonwhichtobaseit.Beliefsthathavenotbeenscientificallytestedmaybethoughtofasmyths.Mythsareexamplesofpseudoscienceandcanbeconsideredasmoreprimitiveformsorprecursorsofscientifictheories.Theyarecharacterizedbydogmaticthinking (that is, the tendency to try to verify our beliefs even tothepointofneglectingobservationsthatconflictwiththosebeliefs).Incontrast,scientificthinkingintroducesthecriticalattitudechar-acterizedbyareadinesstochangeabelief inthelightofevidencethatiscontrary,suchastherefutationofahypothesis.Thus,intheevolutionofthescientificmethod,thecriticalattitudeisnotsomuchopposedtothedogmaticattitudebutratherissuperimposedonit.


27


Exploratory Work Preceding Hypotheses

Itshouldberealizedthatscientificresearchcannotbereducedtoasimpleprocessofforminghypothesesandtestingthem.Animpor-tantcomponentofresearchistheexploratoryinvestigationneededbefore it is possible to arrive at a plausible hypothesis. A certaindegree of understanding of thearea of study has tobe obtained.During exploratory work, scientists proceed to gather informa-tion. As new facts are uncovered, critical thinking may lead toconjectures that are evaluated for their validity. Frequently, theseinitialconjectureshavetobedismissediftheyfailtoexplainalltheobservations.Atsomestage,asaresultofcarefulobservationandfocusedthinking, thescientistmaygaininspirational insight intotheproblembeingtackled.

The hypothetico-deductive scientific method therefore beginswitha conceptual formulationorhypothesis aimedat explainingorrationalizingpreviouslyunexplainedorapparentlyunconnectedphenomena. This is the creative step in scientific research. Next,the concept or hypothesis is subjected to criticism and to experi-mentsdesignedtoseverelytestit,becauseiftheconjectureistrue,certainconsequencesshouldlogicallyfollow.Thisisthedeductivestep. Experiments are carefully designed to attempt to refute thehypothesis. Should the experiments fail to produce a refutation,thenthehypothesisisconsideredtobecorroborated.Thatmeansitisacceptedforthetimebeingbutwiththeprovisothatitmaystillberefutedatalaterdateasaresultofnewobservationsorrationalarguments.Ontheotherhand,shouldthehypothesisfailtopassthetests,itisrejected,andasearchforanewoneiscommenced.Thisissynonymouswiththecriticalattitudeembodiedinthescientificmethod.However,whereattemptstoignoretheresultsortopropuphypothesesaremade, thiscorrespondstoadogmaticattitude,typicalofnonscienceorpseudoscience.

Growth of Scientific Knowledge

Popperemphasizedanimportantaspectofscience—namely,itsneedtogrow.Thegrowthofscientificknowledgedoesnotmeanacon-tinuousaccumulationofobservationsbutacriticalexaminationof


28


theoriesandtheirrefinementorreplacementbybetterones.In thissense,scienceisuniqueinthat,byitsnature,errorsaresystematicallycriticizedand,overtime,corrected.Inhisdeliberationsontheprog-ress of science, Popper posed the question of whether there is adangerthatthegrowthofscientificknowledgewillcometoanendbecausethetaskwillhavebeencompleted.Theanswer,hebelieved,wasanemphatic“no”duetotheinfinityofourignorance.

Dangers to Growth: Lack of Motivation for Inquiry, Misplaced Faith in Precision, Authoritarianism

However,Popperdidseedangerstothegrowthofscientificknowledgeandspecifiedthree.Thesearealackofimaginationorrealinterest,amisplacedfaithinformalizationandprecision,andauthoritarianisminitsvariousforms.Therehavebeentimesthroughouthistorywhentherehasbeenalackofmotivationforinquiry.Wehaveseenthataspiritofcuriosityforunderstandingthenaturalworldisessentialfordiscoveringknowledge.Ifthatisnotpresentinasociety,knowledgecanstagnate.Todaytherearecertainpressuresthattendtodiscour-agegenuineinterestindiscoveringnewknowledge.Thepressuretopublish,discussedinmoredetailinChapter4,tendstorestrictsomeresearcherstotheextentwheretheirpriorityistoscratchthesurfaceofaprobleminordertoputtogetherapaperratherthanconductanin-depthstudy.A preoccupationwithmeasurementsandprecisionratherthanwithconceptsisalsoaconsequenceofmoresuperficialinvestigations.Authoritarianismhasbeentheenemyofthefreedomofthoughtrequiredinsciencethroughouthistory.Thosewhoques-tionedthattheearthwasthecenteroftheuniversewerepersecuted.ThescienceofgeneticsinRussiawasdominatedforalongperiodbyadogma.Impositionofdogmaistheoppositeofthecriticalattitudeofscience.Wherethereareauthoritarianinfluences,dogmatendstoprevail,andscientificprogresstendstostagnate.Aformofauthori-tarianismthatwasnotsoobviousatthetimeofPopper’sexpositionsisthemanagerialsystemsimposedonscienceinrecenttimes.Thesesystemswiththeirwell-definedhierarchicalstructuresandcommandandcontrolmechanismsarediscussedinmoredetailinChapter5.

Oppressive regimes can but do not necessarily always exist inpolitical systems, organized crime, and corporate organizations.They attract a certain type of person, one who seeks to assume


29


powerandcontrol.Thesepersonsusuallyhavelittleornofeelingsforfellowhumans;theyaremotivatedbygreedandpower.Ifthisclimateexistsinascientificorganization,theloserisscienceandthecreativepeoplewhoareresponsibleforitsprogress.Forsciencetoflourish,intellectualfreedomisrequired.Thosewhowishtocontrol,perhaps at times unwittingly, try to suppress this freedom. Theyregard itasdangerous.Creativepeoplearea threat to thosewhowouldcontrol.Throughouthistory,therehavebeenthecreatorsandthedestroyers.Thecreatorsarenotusuallyconcernedwithacquir-ingpower.Alltheyhaveistheircreativity.Ifthisistakenaway,theyareleftwithnothing.

How Scientific Research Can Be Put Off Track Deliberately

Wehaveseenthatscienceisuniqueinthat,byitsnature,errorsaresystematically criticized and eventually corrected. There are twowaysscientificresearchcanbeputoff track.Thefirst isbydelib-eratelypresentingfalseevidencethatmaymisleadresearchers—inotherwords,ahoax.Therehavebeenmanyexamplesofhoaxes,andwewilllookatoneofthemostfamous:PiltdownMan.

Piltdown ManIn1912, fragmentsof a skull and jawbonewere recovered fromagravel pit at Piltdown, a village in East Wessex, England. Manyexperts of the day believed the bones were those of a previouslyunknownformofearlyhuman.Thefindingoftheremainshasnotbeenclearlydocumented,butCharlesDawsonwasthefirsttopresenttheevidence,claimingtohavebeengiventheskullbyaworkmanatthePiltdowngravelpit.Atthetime,therewasgreatinterestintheevolutionofhumans,anditwasthoughtthattherehadbeenagapinthefossilrecordsbetweenearlyhominoidsandmodernhumans.ThePiltdownManwasproposedbymanytofitthis“missinglink.”Subsequently,DawsonwasaccompaniedtothesitebyArthurSmithWoodward,whowasinchargeofthegeologicaldepartmentattheBritishMuseum,andtheyfoundfurtherfragments.Woodwardpro-posedthatPiltdownManwasthemissinglinkbetweenapesandhumans. The findings seemed to combine a human-like cranium


30


(albeitwithabrainsizesmallerthanthatofmodernman)withanape-likejaw.Thistendedtoconfirmtheviewthatwasmostacceptedatthetimethathumanevolutioncommencedwiththebrain.

It must be said that, from the time of the discovery, skepti-cism was expressed by many. Then, in 1923, Franz Weidenreich,ananatomist,examinedtheremainsandreportedthattheywereacompositeofamodernhumancraniumandanorangutan jaw.Althoughthiswascorrect, thecontroversycontinued,anditwasnot until 1953 that the newspaper The Times published evidencegatheredbyanumberofexpertsproving that thePiltdownManwasaforgery.Ithadtaken40yearsfromits“discovery”toitsdefin-itiveexposureasafraud.Theidentityoftheforgerhasneverbeencompletely determined, but Charles Dawson has been the mainsuspect. He had perpetrated various archaeological hoaxes priorto the discoveryof thePiltdownMan.ThePiltdownfraudhadalarge influenceonresearch intohumanevolution.Thebelief thatthehumanbrainexpandedinsizebeforetheadaptionofthejawtonewtypesoffoodconfusedtheissue.Acceptanceofthisdespitecontrary evidence caused a considerable waste of time and heldbackthetheoryofhumanevolutionforseveraldecades.

How Scientific Research Can Be Put Off Track Unintentionally

Thesecondwayinwhichscientistscanbemisledisnotdeliberatelydishonest.Scientificresearch,asdescribedinChapter4,oftenconsistsintravelingalongdead-endroadsuntilitisrealizedthatthesearenotthepathstotruth.Onoccasions,thesedead-endroadshaveresultedinagreatdealofwastedtimeandeffortforthescientificcommu-nity.ExamplesofthishavebeendescribedbyIrvingLangmuir(seeChapter7)underthetermpathological science (LangmuirandHall,1989).Theappropriatenessofthistermhas,however,beencriticizedbyBauer(2002).Thecharacteristicsymptomsofpathologicalsciencearethat“Peoplearetrickedintofalseresultsbylackofunderstandingofwhathumanbeingscandotothemselvesbywayofbeingledastrayby subjective effects, wishful thinking or threshold interactions.”*

*Langmuir, I. 1953. Quoted in: Bad Science (www.catchpenny.org/patho.html),accessedAugust2010.


31


SomeexamplesincludeMartian“canals,”N-rays,polywater,watermemory after infinite dilution of antibodies, and cold fusion. Wewilllookatoneexampleofthis,thepolywatercontroversy.

PolywaterIn1966,Sovietscientistsdiscoveredandreportedthatwhenwaterwasheatedandcondensedinquartzcapillaries, ithadpropertiesverydifferenttoordinarywater.Forexample,ithadahigherdensity,a viscosity about 15 times that of normal water, a boiling pointhigherthan100°C,andafreezingpointlowerthan0°C.Thedirec-toroftheLaboratoryforSurfacePhysicsattheInstituteforPhysicalChemistryinMoscow,BorisDerjaguin,presentedtheseresultsinEnglandata“DiscussionsoftheFaradaySociety”meeting,refer-ringtothematerialas“anomalouswater.”Thetopicgainedinterest,andinthefollowingfewyears,severalhundredpaperswerepub-lishedonit.Someofthesepapersrepeatedtheworkandreportedonpropertiesof thematerial.Somebelieved that itwas indeed anewformofwaterthathadpolymerizedanddubbedthesubstance“polywater.” A concern that arose was that if this form of waterwereamorestableform,thenifitweretocontactordinarywater,it wouldconvertitintopolywater,withdisastrousconsequencesfortheworld’soceansandalllifeprocesses.Otherswereskepticalandquestionedwhether itwasanartifactassociatedwithcontamina-tionintroducedbythemethodofpreparation.Oneoftheproblemswasthatbecauseofthewayitwasprepared,usingfinecapillaries,onlyminutequantitieswereavailableforexperimentalstudy.

AnissueoftheJournal of Colloid and Interface Science(Volume36,Issue4,1971)contains22papersdevotedtothetopicofpolywaterandmakesfascinatingreading.Althoughsomeofthepaperssup-portedtheauthenticityofthephenomenon,manywerecriticalandpresentedevidencethatitwasanartifact.Asoneexample,Lauveretal.(1971)reportedastudyinwhichtheliquidappearinginglassmicrocapillariesduringexperimentstomakepolywaterwasshownby mass spectrometry to contain silicone stopcock grease. Whenstringentprecautionsweretakentoeliminateoil,grease,andothercontaminantsaswellasthepossibilityofcapillarycontaminationby film creep, no water with the alleged properties of polywatercouldbemade.Subsequently,thescientistswhohaddescribedthepropertiesofpolywateradmittedthatitdidnotexist.Theyhadbeenmisled by experiments that were poorly controlled and problems


32


with experimental procedures. As these problems were resolved,evidenceforitsexistencedisappeared.

Thetopicofpolywaterisanextremeexampleofwhatcanhappenwhen scientists are put off track and induced to spend time andeffortonworkthatturnsouttobeessentiallyunproductive.Inthesecases,thedesiretobelieveinaphenomenonoftenovershadowsthedetachmentneededtocriticallyexamineit.

Ontheotherhand,wemustbeawarethatatheorythathasbeendiscreditedorbecomesoutoffavorwiththescientificcommunityforsometimemayreturntofavoratalaterdate.AnexampleofthisisthetheoryofContinentalDrift.Thistheorywasproposedin1912byAlfredWegener.Atthetime,itsoundedfantasticandwas not taken seriously until well into the 1960s. As evidencegrew,thetheorygainedfavorandwaseventuallyaccepted.Careisthereforeneedednottoassumethatifatheoryis“notaccepted”atapointintime,thatthisisalwaysausefulcriterionforrejection.

References

Bauer, H.H. 2002. “Pathological Science” Is Not Scientific Misconduct(nor Is ItPathological).HYLE—International Journal for Philosophy of Science8(1):5–20.

LangmuirI.1953.Quotedin:Bad Science (www.catchpenny.org/patho.html),accessedAugust2010.

Langmuir,I.,andHall,R.N.1989.PathologicalScience.Physics Today36–38.(HalltranscribedandeditedthetalkbyLangmuirintheColloquiumattheKnollsResearchLaboratory[GeneralElectric]onDecember18,1953.)

Lauver, M.R., Wong, E.L., Stearns, C.A., and Kohl, F.J. 1971. PolywaterPreparationandSiliconeGrease.Journal of Colloid and Interface Science36(4):552–553.

Popper,K.R.1959.The Logic of Scientific Discovery,Routledge,London.Popper,K.R.1992.Conjectures and Refutations,5thed.,Routledge,London.

33


Chapter 4AttributesRequiredby

ResearchScientists

Simplicity paradoxically, is the outward sign and symbol ofdepthofthought.Itisonlywhenthoughtbecomesclearthatsimplicityispossible.Whenweseeawriterbelaboringanidea,wemaybesuretheideaisbelaboringthewriter.

AncientChineseSaying

InChapter1,threeimportantrequirementsforsuccessinscientificresearchwereproposed:aspiritofcuriosity,adeepknowledgeofatleastoneareaofscience,andanintensefocusontheproblembeingaddressed.Inadditiontotheserequisites,otherattributesneedtobedeveloped,andwewillexaminesomeofthese.

Citations as a Criterion for Research Value

Popperpointedout(seeChapter3) thatscienceshouldbethoughtofnotasanaccumulationofinformationbutagreaterunderstand-ing resulting from new ideas or refinement of present theories.Unfortunately, todaya lotofactivity thatgoesunder thenameofresearch is simply the former. The pressure placed on scientiststo meet goals tends to reduce the freedom and time for the deepthoughtrequiredtodeveloptheoreticalconcepts.Intheevaluationsof scientists, a high weight is placed on the number of publishedpapers. In viewof this,manyscientists concentrateonaccumulat-ingdata,asthisleadstopublicationmoreeasilyandwithlessrisk.However,publicationsthatincreaseourunderstandingbycreatingneworimprovedtheoreticaltreatmentsshouldcarrythemostpres-tige.Thebestscientificpapersarethosethatinfluencethethinkingofresearchersinthefieldandaffectthedirectionoffutureresearch.Some measure of the impact of a publication may be derived bydeterminingthenumberoftimesithasbeencitedbyotherauthors.


34


Theavailabilityofdatabasesandnewcomputerprogramsisfacili-tating these determinations. A study by the Institute for ScientificInformation(ISI),reportedbyHamilton(1990),onthetop10%ofallscientificjournalsworldwidefrom1981to1984revealedthat55%ofthepapersreceivednocitationsinthefirstfiveyearsaftertheywerepublished.AnearlierISIstudyofarticlesinthehardsciencespub-lishedbetween1969and1981showedthatonly42%receivedmorethanonecitation.Ifitwereassumedthatasimilartrendappliedtopapersinthe1981to1984study,thenitcouldbeconcludedthatasmanyas80%ofpaperspublishedinthatperiodwerenevercitedmorethanonce.Furthermore,self-citation,apracticeinwhichtheauthorscitetheirownearlierwork,accountsforbetween5%and20%ofallcitations. It seems unlikely that this trend in citations would haveimprovedsince thatstudywasmade.According to theISI analyst,DavidPendlebury,“Theconcentratedwisdominthefieldisthat10%ofthejournalsget90%ofthecitations.Thesearethejournalsthatgetread,citedandhavean impact”(citedbyHamilton,1990,p.1331).

Conceptual Thought Required to Form Hypotheses

AsdiscussedinChapter3,thefirststepofthehypothetico-deductivescientificmethodistoformulateaconceptualideatounifyprevi-ously unexplained observations. In order to form hypotheses, acapacityforconceptualthoughtisrequired.Inthiscreativestep,ascientistconfrontsaproblemandconceivesasolutionforitinawaythathasnotbeenpicturedpreviously.Althoughitinvolvescreativity,ausefulhypothesishastobebasedonsolidscientificfoundationsbuilt up by previous workers, otherwise it will risk being ad hoc.Thisiswheredeepknowledgeofascientificdisciplineisessential.Occasionally,an inspiredideamaycomesuddenly.However, thiswill usually happen only after a good deal of thought has beenfocusedontheproblem.Theabilitytothinkconceptuallyisagiftthatcomestoscientistswho,havingacquiredsoundknowledgeinafield,applythemselvestothinkdeeplytotrytocomeupwithahypothesisthatpotentiallywillexplaintheobservationsthathavebeenmade.Ifit isagoodhypothesis, itcanalsobeusedtomakepredictionsthatcanbeputtothetest.Thetestingofthehypothesisthen becomes the deductive part of the process, but even so, thedesignofexperimentscanalsorequirecreativity.

Attributes Required by Research Scientists

35


Experimental design is an important area of statistics. Forexample,ifinanindustrialplantweneedtoknowtheoptimalcon-ditionsformakingaproduct,whereseveralvariablesareinvolved(e.g., temperatureandconcentrationsofseveralreagents),amatrixcan be drawnup in which each of the variables is systematicallyvaried.Statisticiansareabletodeviseanexperimentaldesignthatwilleconomizethenumberofexperimentsbutwillincludeasuffi-cientnumbertogiveareliableanswer.Thisisnotthetypeofexperi-mentaldesigntowhichIamreferring.Whenahypothesisisformed,experimentstotestitareoftennotobvious.Therefore,imaginationisneededtodesigntheexperiments(e.g.,atestofthetheoryofrela-tivitydescribedinChapter3bymeasuringthepositionsofstars).Theexperimentsneedtobeseveretestsofthehypothesisandleadtopossiblerefutations.

Detachment

Anessentialqualityforaresearchscientist todevelopis theabil-ity to separate or detach oneself from one’s own theories. This issomethingthatgoesagainsthumannatureandcannotbelearnedfrom a textbook. It can be learned only through experience byforming hypotheses, having them refuted by critical experimentsorrationalarguments,acceptingthattheywerewrong,andgoingonto formulatenewhypotheses.Iwould like torecountmyownexperienceinthisregard.WhileIwasagraduateresearchstudent,I obtained results that caused me to reach an interpretation thatwasdifferentthanwhathadbeengenerallyaccepted.WhenItookthis“newtheory”tomysupervisor,helistenedpatiently.Hethensuggested that if my ideas were correct, if I did a certain experi-ment,itshouldresultinaconfirmation.Ithoughtatthetimethatitwasunnecessarytodotheexperiment,asIfeltthattheevidenceIhadwassufficientlystrong.However,Idecidedtodotheexperi-mentsothat Icouldgotomysupervisorandsay“Itoldyouso.”Unfortunately, the results of the experiment did not turn out asI expectedand,infact,showedthatmyinterpretationcouldnotbecorrect. Iwassodevastatedby this that I couldnot return to thelaboratory for severaldays. Finally,when I did return andbeganthinking more about the problem, another way of looking at itemerged.Irealizedthatthisnewwaywasmuchsounderthanthe


36


initialone.Thiseventwasrepeatedseveraltimesintheearlypartofmycareer.Oneachsuccessiveoccasion,itbecameeasiertoacceptthatmyearlierhypothesishadbeenerroneousand toproceed toformulateabetterone.Iregardthisas themost importantlessonIhave learned inresearch.Later inmycareer,I founditeasier toviewmytheorieswithgreaterdetachment.IalsofoundthatwhenIacceptedthattheywerewrong,Iwasinvariablyabletomoveonanddevelopbetterones.

Itiseasytofallintothetrapoffeelingasenseofownershipofahypothesisandbeingreluctanttogiveitup,evenwhenitappearstobecontradictedbyexperimentorrationalargument.Theeffectisthatthereisnoroomfornewideastoenter,andcreativityisseverelyimpaired. In extreme cases, scientists feel that they are beingpersonally attacked when their theories are criticized. Of course,criticismisanessentialpartofthescientificprocess. If it isvalid,thenthetheoryisrejected,andasearchforabettertheoryisputintoplace.If,ontheotherhand,thecriticismcanbeshowntonotbejustified,thetheorybecomesstrengthened.Nooneistheownerofa theory,even thoughit iscustomary toascribemanytheoriestodifferentnames.Forexample,thetheoryofrelativityisusuallyreferredtoasEinstein’stheory.WithoutwishingtodetractfromthemeritofEinstein,whomayhavebeenthegreatestscientistwhohasever lived,thetheoryofrelativitywasthereall thetime.Einsteinhappenedtobethefirsttocomeacrossit.

Perseverance

Researchcanbeaveryhardtaskmaster.ItisnoteasytowrestthesecretsfromNature,eventhoughoncetheyhavebeenwrested,itisobviousthatNaturehasnotbeendeliberatelysecretive.Itissimplythatweasscientistshavenotknownhowtogoaboutthediscoveryprocess.Beforetheydofindouthowtogoaboutit,scientistsmayhavetotravelupmanydead-endroadsandexperienceconsiderablefrustration.Theymayoftenreachapointwheretheyfeelthattheyshouldgiveup.Thisisexactlythepointatwhichtheyneedtoresolvetogotheextramile.Thisdoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheyshouldcontinueonthesameobstinatepath,buttheymayneedtoconsiderchangingdirection.Scientistsneedtohavefaiththateffortisalwaysrewarded.Thisishardtoacceptiftheyhavespentdaysorweeks


37


ormoreonworkthatseemstohavebeenacompletewasteoftime.However,itmaybethatthisapparentlywastedeffortisneededtobringthemtoanewpointatwhichtheycanmoveahead.Theymayreceivereassurancebyremindingthemselvesthatothersexperiencethe same disappointments and frustrations. However, in order toarriveatsuccess,theymustnotgiveupbutcontinuethestruggle.

Ethical Standards—Plagiarism

The aim of science is to search for the truth. Thus, scientists areexpectedtoholdtoimpeccablestandardsofhonesty.Thereareabun-dantopportunitiestodeviatefromthesestandards,andtherehavebeencaseswherethedishonestyofscientistshasbeendiscoveredanddocumented.Inadditiontobeingaburdenontheirconscience,exposure can have drastic consequences for their careers and forthereputationofscienceingeneral.Itservesasastarkremindertootherswhomightbetemptedtobewayward.TherejectionofdatapointswaspreviouslydiscussedinChapter2andmayormaynotbedishonestdependingonthecircumstances.Obviousexamplesofdishonestyinvolvefabricationormassagingofdatainordertofitthedatatopreconceivedideas.Adeceitfulpractice,hopefullyrare,is to present data taken from another person or other publishedpaperswithoutreferencingthesource.Thiscomesintotherealmofplagiarism.Themostblatantcasesofplagiarismarewhenmaterialis copiedverbatimwithoutcrediting the source.This is relativelyeasytoidentify.Inrecenttimes,therehasbeenanexplosioninthenumberofscientificjournalsandthenumberofpublishedpapers.Thisismakingitmoreandmoredifficultforreviewersandeditorstoidentifywhenmaterialhasbeencopied.Furthermore,therearemanyformsofplagiarismthatrangefromthecopyingofmaterialverbatimtomoresubtleformswhereitmaynotbeabsolutelycleariftherehasbeenatransgression.Forexample,ascientistmightexpressanideaduringdiscussionataconference,andtheideamaysubse-quentlybepublishedbyanotherwithoutcredit.Onepracticethatisclearlyplagiarismandcausesirritationformanyscientistsisthatoftakingoverownershipofanexperimentalprocedure.John Smithpublishesapaperin2005usingatechniquepublishedbyanotherauthorin1993,perhapswithatrivialmodification.The2005papercitestheoriginalreference(1993).Then,in2010,hepublishesanother


38


paperusingessentiallythesametechnique,whichiscitedasSmith(2005)withoutcreditingthe1993paper.SubsequentpublicationsbythesameandotherauthorscredittheproceduretoSmith (2005).

Anotheropportunityforstealingideasoccurswhenmanuscriptsaresubmittedtojournalsorresearchproposalsaresenttofundingbodiesforreview.WilliamLipscombe,aNobelPrizewinnerinchem-istryin1976,statedthat“Inolongerputmymostoriginalideasinmyresearch proposals, which are read bymany referees andofficials.I holdbackanythingthatanotherinvestigatormighthoponandcarryout.WhenIwasstartingout,peoplerespectedeachother’sresearchmorethantheydotoday,andtherewaslessstealingofideas.”*

Earlyinmycareer,Isubmittedapapertoa journal,anditwasrejected.Afewmonthslater,apaperwaspublishedwhichwasclosetoarepeatofmypaper.Isuspectedthattheauthormayhavebeenareviewerofmypaper,but,ofcourse,Icouldnotbesurebecausemost journalsguard theconfidentialityof reviewers. In thiscase,therewasnoquestionof the ideabeingstolen,as therehadbeeninsufficienttimefortheworktobedoneandwrittenup.However,rejection of a rival paper does allow priority to be established.In mycase,Ieventuallydidmanagetogetthepaperacceptedaftera vigorousdefenseofthecriticismsthathadbeenraised,particu-larly by one reviewer. Although it was published later than therivalpaper,ithadanearlierdateofsubmission.Unfortunately,thissortofrivalrybetweenscientistsisfairlycommon.Theidealsitua-tioniswherethere isanhonestexchangeofinformationbetweenthoseworkingonsimilarproblems.Frequently,scientistsdeclinetoreviewapaperorresearchproposaliftheybelievetheremaybeaconflictofinterest,andthisisanhonorablethingtodo.

Foramorecompletediscussionofethicsinsciencewithalargenumberofcasestudies,Scientific Misconduct: Definition and Real-Life Case Studies byJ.G.D’Angelo(inpress)isrecommended.

Publication

Anessentialrequirementforscientistsisthattheycommunicatetoawideaudienceanysignificantnewknowledgethattheydiscover.This isdonebypublishingpapers in scientific journals, ofwhich

*Bauer,H.H.,Ethics inScience,VirginiaTech (www.files.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/ethics/hbauer/hbauer-intro.html),accessedAugust2010.


39


therearemany,eachspecializinginarestrictedareaofthescientificspectrum.Thereseemstobenopurposeinascientistmakinganadvance inknowledge ifnoone ismadeawareof it.Having rec-ognizedthis,it isalsotruethattherecanbeabuseofpublication.Manypapersarepublishedtodaynotwiththeaimofdisseminat-ing knowledge but to enhance résumés and increase promotionprospects.Someconfirmationofthisisgleanedfromanalysisofthenumberofcitationsforpublishedpapers,referredtoearlierinthechapter.WhenIwasagraduatestudent,therewasafacultymemberwhodividedscientistsintotwogroups:thosewhodidresearchandthosewhopublishedpapers.Thiswassomewhatcynicalandmayhavebeenabittongueincheek.Nevertheless,therewasprobablysometruthinit.Numberofpublicationsisoneofthecriteriamostusedforevaluationofscientificperformance.Frequently,thosewhomakethejudgmentsarenotfamiliarwiththeresearch,andtheonlything theycangoon is thenumberofpublications.Once Ihadaconversation with a senior manager in my research organizationaboutsomeonewhohadpublishedaremarkablenumberofpapersinthespaceofafewyearsandwhowasbeingconsideredforaccel-eratedpromotion.Hetoldmethatthisscientist’sproductivitywasastounding.WhenIaskedhimifhehadreadanyofthepapers,herepliedthathehadnotbutreiteratedthatthisscientist’sproductiv-itywasastounding.Ididnotpursuethematterfurther.Ihadreadsomeofthepapersandwasinagreementthatthenumberofpubli-cationswasastounding,butIhadseriousreservationsaboutusingtheword“productivity”soloosely.

Itisusuallyconsideredthatforscientiststobemakingsatisfactoryprogress,theyneedtopublishacertainnumberofpapersinayear(saytwoorthree).TherewasoneoccasionwhenIpublishedonlyonepaperinacalendaryear.Asaresult,myevaluationwasquiteabitlowerthannormal.Itsohappenedthatonejournalhadbeenunusu-allyslowinpublishingpapersaftertheyhadbeenaccepted.Thus,I hadtwopaperspublishedinJanuaryofthefollowingyearandoneinMarch.Idonotbelievethatmyproductivityhaddeclined.Theonepaperwasananomaly.Thepersondoingtheevaluationhadnowayofknowingthis.Hehadmanyevaluationstocomplete,andtheonlywayforhimtomakeanobjectivedecisionwastorelyonthenumberofpaperspublishedinthepertinentcalendaryear.Imen-tionthistowarnyoungerscientiststobestreetwiseandtakestepstotrytoinsurethattheypublisharespectablenumberofpapersin


40


eachcalendaryear,ifthatisthecriterionused.Theymaynotliketherules,butthesearetheonesthattheyneedtoplayby.Thefixa-tiononthenumberofpublicationstendstoconsiderallpublicationsasbeingequal.Thequalitytendstobeignored,eventhoughtheremaybechasmsbetweenthebestandtheworst.

For someone of principle wishing to build a reputation as aresearchscientist,theaimshouldalwaysbetoproducepublicationsthatpresentgenuineadvancesinknowledge.Goodscientistscon-centrateoncarryingoutaworthwhileresearchproject.Atacertaintime,itbecomesevidentthattheworkhasreachedsomesortofcom-pletion.Then,thetimewillberipetowriteuptheworkandsubmititforconsiderationbyajournal.Writingofthepaperwillfallintoplaceeasilyandlogically.Itmaybethatduringthewriting,addi-tionalexperimentsaresuggested tohelpmakethemessagemorecomplete.Attheoppositeendofthespectrum,scientistswillplantoproduceacertainnumberofpublicationsinagiventime.Often,thepapersarepracticallywrittenbeforetheworkisdone.ThisresearchapproachresemblestheinductivemethodmentionedinChapter3andconsiderednottobeavalidscientificprocedure.Unfortunately,aproportionofthescientificcommunityisnotsufficientlyperceptivetorecognizethisand,basedontheregimentedthinkingdiscussedinChapter2,tendstotreatallpapersassimilarinquality.Inthisway,mediocreresearchisallowedtoflourishwithoutthecriticismthatismerited.Manypapersarepublishedthesedayswithalargenumberofauthors’names.Contributionsbysomeoftheauthorsareminimal.Thisisespeciallysowheresomeinhighpositionsinthehierarchyinsistonhavingtheirnamesonpapersemanatingfromtheirinstitute,eventhoughtheymaynothavecontributedanything.Forsomepapers,alargenumberofauthorsisjustified;forexample,intheelucidationofagenome,thetaskisenormousandcanonlybepracticallycarriedoutbycontributionsfrommany.However,thereareothermultiauthorpaperswhereitishardtoimaginewhatcon-tributionshavebeenmadebyeachauthor.Somesupervisorsinsistthat their researchstudents publishacertain amountbefore theycangraduate. Insome countries (anexample isSweden),doctoralcandidatesareexpectedtosubmitseveralpublished(andaccepted)paperstogetherwiththeirdissertation.Thissystemappearstoworkwellasstudentsarenotsoconstrainedbytimelimitsandareabletoproduceresearchofamaturelevel.Insystemswherestudentshavetofinishinalimitedtime,therequirementtopublishpaperstends


41


tobelittlethevalueofresearch.Itoftenleadstopedestrianpapersthataddlittle,ifanything,togenuineknowledge.Theyaredestinedtojointhelargenumberofpublishedpapersthatarenevercitedorevensighted,asmentionedearlierinthechapter.

Scientists Must Write: A Guide for Better Writing for Scientists, Engineers, and Students givesadviceforscientificwritingandempha-sizeswaysinwhichwritingisimportanttoscientists(Barrass,2002).

Service: Peer Reviewing

Asscientistsmoveaheadintheircareers,theywillincreasinglybeexpectedtocarryoutdutiesapartfromtheirresearch.Forexample,theywillbeexpectedtoserveoncommitteesandmaybeassignedresponsibilityforcertaintaskssuchassupervisingequipmentthatissharedbetweendifferentindividualsorgroups.Thewaythatthesedutiesarecarriedoutwillthereforeimpactoncolleagues.Theymayalsobeexpected toactaschairs for seminarsorconferencesandtoorganizesymposia.Iwillmakesomecommentsontwoareasofserviceinwhichscientistscanexpecttobeinvolved—peerreview-ingandservingonawardcommittees.Eachofthesedutiesencom-passesethicalprinciples.

Asdescribedabove,scientistsareexpectedtocommunicatetheirresearchtotheirpeersanddosobysubmittingarticlestojournals.Ofcourse,itisnotjustamatterofsendingoffanarticleandexpect-ingittobepublished.Scientificstandardsmustbeupheld,andsotheeditorofthejournalinvitesreviewers(normallytwo)toevaluatethe qualityof the submission. The reviewers, who are chosen fortheirexpertiseinthearea,areaskedtogivearecommendation.Itisrareforapapertobeacceptedunchanged.First,itmayberejectedby the editor without review because it is inappropriate for thejournal,mayhaveobviousdeficienciesinthescience,ormayfailtopresentanyworthwhilenewknowledge.Beforesubmittingapaper,theauthor(orauthors)shouldreadtheguidelinesthateachjournalprovidestoensurethatthepapercomplies.Ifthepaperissentoutforreview,theeditorwillmakeadecisionbasedonhisorherownandthereviewers’evaluations.

Reviewingapaperisaserioustask.Frequently,thetopicwillnotbeexactlyintheareaofthereviewer’sexpertiseandmayrequiremanyhoursofworktobecomefamiliarwiththesubjectandtobe


42


inapositiontomakeasoundassessment.Allscientistsdependonreviewers,whoservevoluntarilyandarenotrecompenseddirectly.However,atuniversitiesandscientificorganizations,reviewing isacceptedasanimportantduty,andscientistsareexpectedtoallotacertainpercentageoftheirtimetoit.Youngerscientistswhohavehadsomeexperienceinresearchandhavepublishedpapersarewelladvisedtovolunteertheirservicesasreviewerstojournals.Iftheybuilduparecordofacceptinginvitationstoreviewanddothisreli-ably,theymaybeinvitedtoserveontheeditorialboardofajournal.Thiswillgivethemprestigeandhelpthemalongtheircareerpath.

Inthemain,scientistssubmittoacceptingamoderatenumberofpaperstoreview.Ofcourse,journaleditorsshouldnotrewardgoodreviewersbyoverburdeningthemwithinvitationstoreview.Attheotherextreme,therearethefreeloaders.Thesearepeoplewhoexpect their submissions tobepromptlyreviewedbutcon-tinuallyrefuserequestsforthemtoactasreviewers.Whenaskedto give a reason fordeclining, some say theyare toobusy.Thisisacop-out.Everybodyistoobusy,butmanyscientistsacceptaheavyworkloadofreviewing,notbecausetheyarenotbusyandhave a lot of free time, but because they take their responsibili-tiesseriously.Ofcourse,therewillbeoccasionswhenagenuinereviewer isunable tocomplywith the invitation. In these cases,the reviewerwill replypromptlyandmay try to suggestoneormorealternativereviewers.Withthegreatadvancesincomputerprogramstomonitor,itisrelativelyeasyforjournalstoobtainlistsof reviewer records. I recently noticed that one scientist, who iswell known in the field, had accepted to review one paper anddeclined13.ThisisapersonwhoisevidentlyhighlyregardedbypeersandhasreceivedatleastoneawardthatIknowof.Perhapsitwouldbefittingifthissortofinformationisconsideredbeforegivingawards.Thereareotherabusesofethicalprinciplesrelatedto reviewing. For example, some never reply to invitations ordeclineafterseveralremindershavebeensent.Othersaccepttheinvitation to review but neverdeliver. All this means that someauthors are unfairly subjected to longer waiting periods thanthey should experience. Another reviewer may return a recom-mendation to accept without providing any comments or veryfew.Unfortunatelyforthisreviewer,theotherreviewer,whodidthe jobconscientiously,maycomeupwitha longlistofobviousobjectionstothepaper.Thisdemonstratesthatthefirstreviewer


43


hastakentheeasywayout.Fortunately,Idonotbelievethatthishappensoften,butitdoes happen.

Service: Serving on Awards Committees

Scientistsmaybenominatedforawardstorecognizetheiroutstand-ingresearchorothercontributions,suchasservicetoassociations.Toadministerawards,itisusualtoappointcommittees.Membersofawardcommitteesareentrustedwiththeresponsibilitytoselectthemostdeservingcandidatefromthosewhoareeligible.Ifthereisaperceptionthatthisisnotachieved,itcanleadtocynicismandtoloweringofmoraleamongthescientificcommunity.Thecommit-teenormallyconsistsofachairandseveralmembers,whoideallyshouldbeselectedfortheirdeepknowledgeofthefieldandtheircapacityforsoundjudgment.Theguidelinesforprestigiousawardsareusuallyclearlydefined,andit is thedutyof thecommitteetomakeachoiceofrecipientbasedontheseguidelines.Customarily,itisonlypossibleforindividualstoreceiveawardsiftheyarenomi-nated. Therefore, it is imperative that the committee be proactiveto ensure that all the names of those deserving of the award areput forward.Membersofcommitteesarenormallynot eligible tonominate. However, they have the responsibility of encouragingothers to nominate deserving candidates. It is highly unfair thatanyonewhoiseminentlydeservingofanawardfailstobeconsid-eredbecauseheorsheisnotnominated.

Ihaveobserved thatsomeawardcommitteesarenotproactiveinthissense.Theymaygivelittlethoughttopotentialcandidates,waitpassivelyfornominationstobemade,andthenperhapsselectthecandidatetheythinkisbest.Thisoftenleadstoawardsbeingmadeeveryyear.Therearetwoproblemswiththisapproach.First,it can lead todeservingcandidates notbeingnominated. Second,recipients should only be selected if they fulfill the guidelines oftheaward.Itisnotsimplyamatterofchoosingthebestcandidate.Ifnoneofthenomineesmeetthecriteriaoutlinedintheguidelines,thennoawardshouldbemade.

Whatcanhappenifacommitteeislaxisthattheselectedawardeemay simply be the one most strongly supported by friends andcolleagues.Itcanalsobethatthereisonlyonecandidatenominated.Thebestpersontonominateacandidatemaywellbeacolleague


44


fromthesameinstitution.Unfortunately,becauseofapathyorpettyjealousy,anominationmaynotbemade.Thisiswheretheinfluenceoftheawardcommitteeisessential.

Thechoiceofmembersofawardcommitteesiscrucial.Itshouldnot be made to reward friends or to include the right balance ofminoritygroups.Itissuchaseriousresponsibilitythatonlythoseknownfor theirsoundnessof judgmentshouldbeconsidered.Tosubmitanomination,thenominatorprovidesaletteroutlininghowthenomineemeetsthecriteriaoftheawardandreasonswhyheorsheshouldbearecipient.Inadditiontothenominatingletter,itisadvisabletoincludeorrequestsupportinglettersfromotherdistin-guishedscientistswhoarefamiliarwiththeworkofthenominee.Thecommitteealsohasthechoicetoseekindependentassessmentofthecandidatefromotherswithexpertiseinthefield.Thiscanbevaluableforobtainingmoreobjectivity,becausesupportinglettersarealwayshighlypositive,astheyshouldbe.

Grantsmanship

Thetighteningofbudgetsatuniversitiesandresearchorganizationsmeansthatscientistsareincreasinglybeingaskedtofindfundingfor their own research programs. There is a limit to these funds,sothereisintensecompetitionandmanymissoutonashare.Thepursuitoffundinghasbecomeaseriousactivityforscientiststryingtodevelopresearchprograms.Searchingfor fundingsourcesandwritingandsubmittingproposalscanbeverytimeconsuming.Itisquitepossibleforscientiststoturnitintoclosetoafull-timeactivity.Thistimethenencroachesintothetimeneededtocarryoutotherduties, such as teaching, peer reviewing, serving on committees,carryingoutresearch,supervisinggraduatestudents,andwritingpapers.Thetimedevotedtoseekingfundingthereforeneedstobeplanned efficiently.Forexample, university facultymembersmayhavemoretimetodevotetograntwritingduringthelongvacationwhen the teaching load is reduced. It is important to understandwhatisrequiredinpreparingaproposal.Somefundingbodiesorga-nizeworkshopsinwhichguidelinesaregivenforwritingsuccessfulproposals.Attendanceattheseishighlyrecommended,althoughitmaybenecessarytotravel.Inpreparingproposals,attentionneedstobefocusedoncloselyadheringtotheinstructionsandsubmitting


45


aproposal that fallswithin thepriorityareasof research thatareinvited.Somefundingbodieshavepanels responsible forspecificareasofresearch.Itisadvisablebeforesubmissionofaproposalthatapplicantscontactthepanelmanagertoensurethatthetopictheyintendtoproposeanditscostingaresuitable.Iknowofoneinstancewherethefundingbodyissuednewguidelinesinwhichtheystipu-latedthatlargerprojectshavingbudgetswithahigherrangethanpreviouslystatedshouldbesubmitted.Ihappenedtomeetoneofthepanelmembersataconferenceafterdecisionshadbeenmade.Hesaidthatwhenthepanelmet,theirprioritywastofundasmanyprojects as possible. They therefore began their deliberations byeliminating thoseproposalswith thehighestbudgets.Thesehap-penedtobeintherangerecommendedbythefundingbodyadmin-istration.Therewasthusanobviousmismatchbetweentheissuedguidelines and the modus operandi of the panel. Funding bodiesnormally tryhardtoremoveanyconflictof interest inevaluatingproposals.Ononeoccasion,Idiscoveredbyaccidentthatoneofthereviewersformyproposalwassomeonewhohadalsosubmittedaproposaltothesamepanel.Thiscanhappenbecausethereareonlyalimitednumberofexpertswhoarequalifiedtoactasreviewersforagivenproposal.Todealwiththesesortsofissues,itisimportanttomaintainagoodlineofcontactwiththepanelmanager.

Successful grant applications usually have a low success rate.Somelargefundingbodieshavesufficientresources to fundonlyabout10%ofproposals.Thus,applicantshavetobecomeaccustomedtomanyfailures.Largefundingbodiesusuallyprovidereviewers’reportstoapplicants.Ifthefirstapplicationisnotsuccessful,appli-cants need to revise their proposals and make improvementsto address all of the reviewers’ comments. These improvementsshouldbeclearlystatedinthedocumentationsubmittedwiththenewproposal.Ifthisisdoneconscientiously,thechancesofsuccesswillbeenhancedthesecondoreventhirdtimearound.Itisalwayshelpfultoincludepreliminaryresultsinanyproposal,whetheritisthefirstorarevisedone.

Fundingmayalsobesoughtdirectlyfromindustrialcompanies.Faculty members may act as consultants or obtain funding for aprojecttobenefitthecompany.Thismaytaketheformoffinanciallysupportingagraduatestudentforatime.Toinitiateaproject, thescientist may visit the company and present a seminar outliningtheexpertisethatcanbeofferedtothecompany.Ifthecompanyis


46


interested,aconfidentialityagreementwillneedtobesignedsothatthecompanycandivulgeinformation. Ifanagreementisreachedforfunding,itisimperativethatthescientistbecomefamiliarwiththeproblemtobetackledandnotacceptwithoutquestionwhatheorsheistolditis.Thiswilloftentaketheformofvisitstotheplanttobecomeacquaintedfirsthandwithwhatisinvolved.Sometimescompanyrepresentativeswillhavetheirowninterpretationoftheproblem.Thismaynot correspondexactlywith theperceptionofthescientistaftervisitstotheproductionlineanddiscussionswithcompanystaff.Also,thecompanymayhavestaffwhosufferfromthe regimented thinking that was mentioned in Chapter 2. Theymaybebiasedagainstsomesoundapproachesandhavefixationsabout other dubious ones. The persons seeking funding supportmayneedtobeassertiveindefendingtheirviewsandexplainingclearlytheflawsinthealternativeapproaches.

A new appointee to a faculty position in a university sciencedepartment may consider a mixture of fundamental and appliedresearchforhisorherprogram.Researchhasbecomemoremulti-disciplinary.Tobesuccessful,itisalmostessentialthatnewfacultymemberslooktocolleaguesinotherdepartmentstodevelopcoop-erativeresearchprojects.Multidepartmentalandmultidisciplinaryteamstendtobefavoredbyfundingbodies.Thereareoftenspecialgrants for new faculty or younger scientists, and these should beactively sought.Whendevelopinga research program,ayoungerscientist should aim to build it on solid foundations. This meansthatthestructureshouldbebasedonsciencethathasbeentriedandtested. It ispreferable tobuildslowlyandsurelyratherthanrushintoaprogrambasedonshakypremises.Likepoorlyconstructedbuildings, research programs, if not firmly based, can becomeunstableandcollapse.


47


BRAINSTORMING

The requirement for deep reflective thinking in research hasbeen emphasized. Some science departments organize fre-quentmeetingsforresearchstaff.Thesecanbevaluable,par-ticularlyinindustrywhere,often,multidisciplinaryteamsareengagedinprojects,anditisimportanttokeepmembersoftheproject updated. These meetings, if properly organized, willbeshort. Inmoreacademicsurroundings,meetingsareoftenunnecessarily frequent and excessively long. The reason thatthey are over long is that there are always those who thriveonmeetingsasitgivesthemtheopportunitytoexercisetheirnaturalverbosity.Itisalsoanopportunityforsometoengageinbullying tactics,point scoring,and one-upmanship.Thosewhoarenotnaturallyverbosefindthisactivitydifficulttocopewith. It isnotwhat theyexpectedwhen theyembarkedonaresearchcareer.Ihaveknownpostdocsandyoungerscientiststhatcouldnotsupportsuchanenvironmentandhave left tofindotheremployment.Often,thesearetalentedscientistswhotheorganizationcanillaffordtolose.Oneaimofmeetingsistoenablethosewhohavenoideasoftheirowntoextractideasfromthosewhohave.Thosewhoarealerttohavingtheirideasstolenmaybereluctanttoprovidethemandthusruntheriskofbeingbrandedasnotbeingteamplayers.Anotheraimistogetinformationwithoutthetroubleofhavingtoreadtheliterature.Thelatter isadangerousactivity,asitmayleadtoabsorbingfactsthatarenotreliable.Oneoftheploysofmeetingsistousethemforbrainstormingsessions.Brainstormingisanactivitythatappearstohavebeguninadvertisingcompanieswheretheaimwastodevelopjinglesthatsellproductslikesoappowders.

The way brainstorming works is that people form a ringaroundatable.Tobegin,onepersonsaysthefirstthingthatcomesintohisorherhead.Theythengoaroundthetable,eachhavinganinput.Theideaisthat,inthisway,theywilleventu-allyarriveattheabsolutetruth.Itisabitlikethetheorythatifyouputagroupofmonkeysinaroomwithapianoandreamsofsheetmusic,providingtheyarelefttherelongenough,theywilleventuallycomposeallthesymphoniesofBeethoven.


48


WHYIBECAMEASCIENTIST

MydecisiontopursueacareerinsciencewasmainlyinfluencedbyterrificprofessorsatVassar.IenteredcollegeasanEnglishmajor,intendingtobecomeawriter.Afreshman-yearcourseinpersonalitypsychologychangedmydirection.

At Vassar, I worked as a research assistant for a professorstudyingmemory.ThetrainingIreceivedinmybiology,chemis-try,andphysicsclassessharpenedmyskills.Ievenvolunteeredasanassistantinmyorganicchemistryprofessor’slab,studyingthepropertiesofamber.Thisresearchhadnothingtodowithmycareerplans,butIlovedtheexcitementofscientificdiscovery.

After30yearsasacollegeprofessor,Ihavecometobelievethatthekeytoinspiringstudentstopursuecareersinscienceisnotmakingscienceappearrelevanttoeverydaylifebuthelp-ingstudentsexperiencetheexcitementof theresearchenter-prise.Fewthingsareassatisfyingasconstructingahypothesis,designinganexperimenttotestthathypothesis,carryingouttheexperiment,anddiscoveringwhetheryouwereright.

Toomuchoftoday’sscienceeducationfocusesonmakingstu-dentsmemorizebitsofinformationthatwillbeoutdatedwithinafewyears.Toolittleemphasizeshowtothinklikeascientist.Andthereisnosubstituteforhands-onresearchexperience.

LaurenceSteinberg,DistinguishedProfessorofPsychology,TempleUniversity,Philadelphia (Steinberg, L., December 2006/January 2007, “Science in theSpotlight,” Science Educational Leadership, 64(4) (www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec06/vol64/num04/Why-I-Beca).Copyright2006bytheAssociationforSupervisionandCurriculumDevelopment.)


49


My mother made me a scientist without ever intending to. Every Jewish mother in Brooklyn would ask her child after school “So? Did you learn anything today?” But not my mother. “Izzy” she would say, “Did you ask a good question today?” That difference—asking good questions—made me become a scientist.*(IsidorIsaacRabi)

Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones, so is science made of facts, but a pile of stones is not a house and a collection of facts is not necessarily science.†(HenriPoincare)

At Princeton, Albert Einstein was more like a kindly uncle. When he arrived in 1935, he was asked what he would require for his study. He replied, “A desk, some pads, a pencil, and a large wastebasket to hold all of my mistakes.”‡

The real scientist … is ready to bear privation and, if need be, star-vation, rather than let anyone dictate to him which direction his work must take.§(AlbertSzent-Gyorgi)

It is a good morning exercise for a research scientist to discard a pet hypothesis every day before breakfast. It keeps him young.¶(KonradLorenz)

In science it often happens that scientists say, “You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken.” And then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it does happen every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.**(CarlSagan)

* BookRags.com (www.bookrags.com/quotes/Isidor_Isaac_Rabi), accessed April26,2011.

† The Quotations Page (www.quotationspage.com/quote/33017.html), accessedApril26,2011.

‡ BrainAthlete(www.brainathlete.com/category/thinkeinstein/page/3/),accessedApril26,2011.

§ BrainyQuote.com (www.brainyquote.com/quotes/.../a/albert_szentgyorgi.html),accessedApril26,2011.

¶ TheQuotationsPage(www.quotationspage.com/subjects/science),accessedApril26,2011.

** The Quotations Page (www.quotationspage/com/quote14337.html), accessedApril26,2011.


50


I am among those who think that science has great beauty. A scientist in his laboratory is not only a technician: he is a child placed before natural phenomena which impress him like a fairy tale.*(MarieCurie)

It is of interest to note that while some dolphins are reported to have learned English—up to 50 words in correct context—no human being has been reported to have learned dolphinese.†(CarlSagan)

The doubter is a true man of science, he doubts himself and his inter-pretations, but he believes in science.‡(ClaudeBernard)

* The Quotations Page (www.quotationspage.com/quote/34022.html), accessedApril26,2011.

† Vacilando(www.vacilando.net/node/273221),accessedApril26,2011.‡ FinestQuotes.com(www.finestquotes.com/author_quotes-author-Claude%20Bernard-

page-0.htm),accessedApril26,2011.


51


If we knew what we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?*(AlbertEinstein)

May every young scientist remember and not fail to keep his eyes open for the possibility that an irritating failure of his apparatus to give consistent results may once or twice in a lifetime conceal an important discovery.†(PatrickM.S.Blackett)

* QuoteDB.com(www.quotedb.com.quotes/2310),April26,2011.† QuotesBy.com(www.quotesby.co.uk/quotes/q113291),April26,2011.

PARTICULARUNCERTAINTY

DespiteWernerHeisenberg’sNobelPrizeforitsformulation,Albert Einstein never accepted the so-called “uncertaintyprinciple”(whichstatesthatthemorecarefullyonemeasuresthepositionofagivenparticle,thelesscertainitsmomentumbecomes)becauseitthreatenedtowreakhavocwiththestrictdeterminisminwhichhebelieved.

Indeed,theuncertaintyprinciplewasasubjectaboutwhichEinsteinandNielsBohrarguedmanytimesovertheyears.Ononememorableoccasion(attheSolvayConferenceinBrusselsin 1930) Einstein unveiled the product of one of his famous“thought experiments”; an imaginary device comprised ofclocksandscales,which,heclaimed,violatedtheprinciple.

Followingasleeplessnight,however,BohrdiscoveredthatEinstein had made a critical error; he had neglected to takeintoaccountthefactthatclocksrunslowerinagravitationalfield,aconsequence,ratherironically,ofEinstein’sowntheoryofrelativity.

Little Brown Book of Anecdotes (www.anecdotage.com/index.php?aid=11843),accessedApril26,2011.


52


References

Barrass,R.2002.Scientists Must Write: A Guide for Better Writing for Scientists,Engineers, and Students,Routledge,NewYork.

D’Angelo,J.G.(inpress).Scientific Misconduct: Definition and Real-Life Case Studies,Taylor&Francis,BocaRaton,Florida.

Hamilton, D.P. 1990. “Publishing by—and for?—the Numbers.” Science 250:1331–1332.

53


Chapter 5TheImpactofManagerialism

My grandfather once told me that there were two kindsof people: those who do the work and those who take thecredit.Hetoldmetotry tobe in thefirstgroup, therewasmuchless competition.*

IndiraGandhi

The Managerial Ideology

In the past few decades, a rise in the influence of managerialismonscientificresearchhasbeenseen.Thoseenteringthefieldmustexpecttocomeupagainstthisreality.Briefly,thischangeconcernstheapplicationofbusinessmanagementprinciplestoorganizationswiththeaimofproducingeconomicefficiencyor,putanotherway,thepursuitofmaximumoutputwithminimuminputs.Acentraldogmaofmanagerialismisthebeliefthatorganizationshavemoresimilaritiesthandifferences;thus,theperformanceofallorganiza-tionscanbeoptimizedbytheapplicationofgenericmanagementskills and theory. To those practicing this system, there is littledifferenceintheskillsrequiredtorunaresearchorganization,anadvertisingagency,orafactoryturningoutmachines.Theexperi-enceandskillsassociatedwiththeorganization’scorebusinessareconsideredtobeunimportantoratleastsecondary.Thismanage-mentideologyhasbeenappliedtomanyorganizations,butIwouldliketofocusontheeffectsthatithashadonscientificresearchandwilltakeasanexampletheCommonwealthScientificandIndustrialResearchOrganization(CSIRO)ofAustralia.

*The Quotations Page (www.quotationspage.com/quote/39781.html), accessedAugust2010.


54


Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) of Australia

The CSIRO was established under an Act of Parliament in 1949,beinganextensionofthepreviousCSIR(CouncilforScientificandIndustrialResearch). Itsaimwas toprovideresearch for industryand government to enhance economic development. It was struc-turedintodivisionsandsmallergroupsorunits,eachfocusedonaspecific industry,andwasheadedbyanexecutivemanagementcouncilconsistingofafull-timechairmanandfourfull-timemem-berswithasmallnumberofpart-timemembersdrawnfrombusi-nessanduniversitybackgrounds.Allthefull-timemembersweresenior scientistsand employees ofCSIRO.Divisionswere headedbychiefs,andunitsbyofficers-in-chargewhoreporteddirectlytoamemberoftheexecutivemanagementcouncil.Inafewdecadesfol-lowingitsformation,theorganizationflourishedandmadeimpor-tantcontributionstoAustralianindustriesaswellastofundamentalresearch such as radio astronomy. Later, its activities expandedintootherareasaffecting thecommunity, includingenvironment,humannutrition,urbanandruralplanning,andwatersupplies.

Reviews of CSIRO

CSIRO has been subjected to numerous reviews since its estab-lishment,butIwillmentiononlytwothathaveresultedinappre-ciable reorganization. Asa resultof the 1977 report by theBirchCommittee, divisions were grouped into five institutes, eachheadedbyadirectorwhoserolewasmanagerial (CSIROAnnualReport1977/78,p. 11).Divisionalchiefsreportedtoinstitutedirec-tors,who in turn reported to theexecutivemanagement council.Inthedecadefollowingthisreview,ariseofeconomicrationalismwasseen.Economic rationalism isanAustraliantermforadogmathat resembles what has been called Thatcherism in the UnitedKingdomandReaganomicsintheUnitedStates.Thiseconomicman-agement approach, which has gained momentum, particularly inEnglish-speakingWesterncountries,placesastrongrelianceontheworkingsofthefreemarket.

The Impact of Managerialism

55


Effects of McKinsey Review

Inthispolitical-economicclimate,theglobalmanagementconsult-ing firm McKinsey and Company was contracted to carry out areviewofCSIROin1986.Theacceptanceoftheirrecommendationsresultedinthemostfar-reachingrestructuringinCSIRO’shistory.Following from the McKinsey report, the executive managementcouncil, made up of senior CSIRO scientists, was abolished, andtheorganizationwasplacedunderthecontroloftheCSIROboard,whosemembersweredrawnlargelyfromthebusinessworld.Thefive institutesestablished in 1979 following theBirch report werereplacedwithsixinstitutes,eachrelatedtoasectionofthenationaleconomy.Theprevious41divisionswerereducedto32divisions,and all units were amalgamated into existing divisions. It wasfurther proposed that CSIRO should find more of its funds fromnon-Treasury sources. One of the recommendations adopted wasthatavigorousprogramofmanagementtrainingforstaffbeintro-duced(CSIROAnnualReport1986/87,p.7).

Iwasattachedtoaunitwhosemissionwastocarryoutresearchtosupportthewheatindustry,alargedomesticandevenlargerexportindustryinAustralia.Theunit,locatedinSydney,wasmakinguse-fulcontributionstotheindustry.Amongthecontributions,methodshadbeendevelopedformeasuringproteinandstarchcontentandcomposition and for identifying wheat varieties. These advancesfacilitatedthesegregationofconsignmentsforthedifferentexportmarkets, placing the country at an advantage with its competi-tors.TheunitcollaboratedwithanAustraliancompanytodevelopan instrument for quantifying the quality of grain that had beensubjectedtovaryingdegreesofweatherdamage.Theusesofthisinstrument,theRapidViscoAnalyzer(RVA),havesincebeengreatlyexpanded,andnowitisusedworldwideforarangeofapplicationsinthefoodindustry.Atthetime,theunitwasbeingawardedmorethan50%ofitsfundingbyindustry,andalthoughsmall,itsresearchwashighlyregardedinternationally.TheoutcomeoftheMcKinseyReportwasthattheunitbecameattachedtoalargedivision,whoseheadquarters were located in Canberra, a three-hour drive fromSydney.Asinvariablyhappensinamanagerialclimate,thisdivisionbroughtina“newbroom.”Thepreviousworkoftheunitwasdis-credited,andanewapproachwastrumpeted.Thisnewapproach


56


hasnot,however,contributedanythingofvaluetotheindustry.Theunitwaslaterdisbanded.MembersweregiventheopportunitytomovetoCanberraundertheguisethattheworkwouldbecontin-uedandenhancedthere.Althoughsomedidrelocate,therewasnotthelevelofexpertiserequiredtoviablycontinuetheworkthathadproceededinSydney,andsoitfairlyquicklypeteredout.IdonotbelievethatMcKinseyandCompanybotheredtofindoutanythingabouttheworkoftheunit,orevenknewitexisted,sofocusedweretheyonthe“bigpicture”involvingmanagementandrestructuring.However, their involvement resulted in the demise of a resourcethatcouldhavecontinuedtomakeausefulcontributiontooneofAustralia’sforemostindustries.

Inacolumnentitled“TheMoralPygmiesWhoRuntheBigEndofTown,”Sydney Morning HeraldcolumnistMirandaDevinereferredtoanarticlebyMalcolmGladwellinThe New Yorker.Shewrote:

Gladwellwritesabouthowthefamousmanagementconsult-ing firm, McKinsey & Company, drove a new managementorthodoxyknownas“thetalentmind-set”acrossthecorporateworld.Thebestcompanies,theysaid,singledoutandlavishlyrewardedtheir“stars,”recruitedthebestandbrightestMBAsfromthetopbusinessschools,pushedthemintoseniorposi-tionsovertheirheads,prizingonlytheirinnate“talentandlackofexperience.”McKinseyspreadthemessage“ardently”andofallitsgratefulclients,onewasthemostreceptive.Gladwellwrites“ItwasthecompanywhereMcKinseyconducted20sep-arateprojects,whereMcKinseybillingstopped$US10milliona year, where McKinsey directors regularly attended boardmeetingsandwheretheCEOhimselfwasaformerMcKinseypartner.Thecompany,ofcourse,wasEnron.”*

Enron was an American energy company. Its share price hit ahighof$US90pershareinmid-2000andthenplummetedtolessthan$US1bytheendofNovember2001.Itbecamethelargestcor-poratebankruptcyinU.S.historyuptothattime,withconsequentfinancialdisasterforitsshareholdersandemployeesalike.

*Devine, Miranda, “The Moral Pygmies Who Run the Big End of Town,”Sydney Morning Herald, July 21, 2002 (www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/20/1026898930296.html).


57


The“talentmind-set”promulgatedbyMcKinseyhasbeenevidentinCSIRO.Thosechosenas“stars”havehadtheearsofsuperiorsandhaveusedtheprivilegetotellthemwhattheylikedtohearratherthanwhattheyshouldhavebeentold.Someoftheseanointedonescontinued tobe supportedevenafterahistoryofblunders,whilethosewhogotonquietlydoingtheirjobsweretreatedwithdisdain.

Other CSIRO laboratories experienced similar effects to whatI havedescribedaboveasaresultoftheimpositionofmanagerialprinciples.Forexample,in1988,theboarddecreedthattheDivisionofSoilsshouldaimtofind30%(later25%)ofitstotalfundingfromnon-Treasurysources(Lee,1998).Asaresult,itincreasinglybecamenecessarytodesignandworkonprojectsthatwouldbefundedbysponsorspreparedtofundshort-termresearch.Theplanningandpreparationofgrantproposalsandthecorrespondingreportsthatneededtobefurnishedoccupiedagreatdealoftime,mainlyforthemoreseniorscientists.Furthermore,thenatureofgrant-supportedresearch is such that projects are problem oriented with shortlifetimes,usuallynotmore than threeyears.This lackofassuredfunding meant the erosion of long-term projects involving basicscience.Previously,thedivision’scapacitytosupportsuchresearchhad enabled scientists toacquire the expertise that brought themrecognitionasleadingauthoritiesintheirfield,withthecapacitytocarryoutresearchforthepublicgood.

ThechangesintroducedasaresultoftheMcKinseyreviewrep-resentedatransitionforCSIROfromasolidlybasedscienceorgani-zationdedicatedtoresearchtowhatwasessentiallyacorporatizedbody with all theaccompanying consequences, such as outsourc-ing and downsizing. Long-term research for the public good hastended to make way for short-term consultancies. In an Internetblog,JohnQuiggingaveaperceptivedescriptionofmanagerialism:“Themainfeaturesofmanagerialismpolicyareincessantorganiza-tionalrestructuring,sharpeningofincentivesandexpansioninthepower and remuneration of senior managers, with a correspond-ing downgrading of the role of skilled workers and particularlyprofessionals.”*Attheendof1994,aSydney Morning Heraldeditorial(cited by Rees, 1995) concluded, “So confused is the organizationthesedaysbytherelentlessprobingandreorganizingthatnoone

*John Quiggin Blog,“WordforWednesday:Managerialism”(www.johnquiggin.com/archives/001363.html),July2,2003.


58


hasanyclearideaswhatitsjobis…PoliticiansandbureaucratslovetorturingtheCSIRO.”*Inablog,ShelleyGare,reportedonhowthenumberofhighlypaidmanagementpositionsinCSIROhadrisensharply, stating that, “In the 2004–2005 annual report, there werefiveexecutivesearningover$320,000.Thenextyeartherewerenineand,inthe2006report,thereweretwelve.SeniorResearchScientiststhough are on between $100,000 and $120,000. In the six years toJune 2004, while corporate positions were doubling, 316 peoplewentfromresearchprojects.”†Thedesignationoftheresearchandtechnicalstaffunderwentachangeduringtheperiodfollowingthereorganization.Levelswereassignedtodifferentclassifications.Forexample,seniorresearchscientistsbecameCSOFlevel6,principalresearchscientistsbecameCSOFlevel7,andsoon,anexampleofthedowngradingofprofessionalsreferredtobyJohnQuiggin.

OneoftheepisodesoftheBBCcomedyprogram“YesMinister”featuredahospital thathadbeenoperating for15months. Ithad500nonmedicalstaffandwasbeingrunveryefficiently.However,therehadbeennopatientsormedicalstaffsinceitsinception.Coulditbethatsomescientificresearchorganizationsreachastagewheretheyarebeingrunefficientlybutwillhavenogenuinemotivatedscientistslefttodotheresearch?

Freedom of Expression in Science

Anothereffectoftheencroachmentofmanagementonsciencehasbeenthepreventionofscientistsfromexpressingtheiropinionsonareasoftheirexpertise.InanarticleintheCanberra Times,RosslynBeeby‡reportedonaspeechbyadistinguishedCSIROscientist,Dr.HughTyndale-Biscoe,ontheoccasionofthelaunchofanewedi-tionofhisinfluentialtextbook.Tyndale-BiscoesaidthatCSIROhadpreviouslygivenprimacytoscientists,notadministrators—distin-guishedscientists led it,and theadministrationwasdedicated tosupporting the scientist and technician at all levels. He said thatmodern management practices were comparable to 1930s Soviet

*Editorial,Sydney Morning Herald,December16,1994(ascitedbyRees,1995).† Contaminated Life Blog, Robyn Williams, “Nothing Is the New Something”

(Transcriptofan interviewwithShelleyGare)(liveness.org/contaminated-life/?p=54),February25,2007.

‡ Beeby,Rosslyn,“NotedEcologistSlamsCSIRO,”Canberra Times,May7,2005,p.1.


59


science minister Nicolai Bukharin’s determination to “neutralize”scientificoppositiontogovernmentplanning,andthiswascompro-misingscientificindependence.Arecentexampleoftheattemptedgaggingofascientificviewpoint,whichwasprominentlyfeaturedbythemediainlate2009,hasbeenthetreatmentofCSIROscientistDr.CliveSpash.SpashsubmittedapapertoNew Political Economywhichwaspeerreviewedandacceptedforpublication.Inthepaperentitled“TheBraveNewWorldofCarbonTrading,”itwassuggestedthatemissiontradingschemes,whichthegovernmenthadhopedtointroduce,werenottheanswertoclimatechange.CSIROtopman-agement prevented Spash from proceeding to publish unless themanuscriptwasaltered,somethingtheauthorandthejournalfoundunacceptable.Inabitterdispute,Spash,whohadbeenheadhuntedbyCSIRO,resigned,claimingtohavebeensubjectedtoharassmentandintimidationaswellascensorship.Althoughthetopicofleader-shipwillbediscussedinthenextchapter,itistimelytorefertoonedistinguishingfeaturethatrelatesto leadership.Goodleadersarethosewhoareloyaltotheirsubordinates,providingtheyaredoingtheirjobsastheyareexpectedto.Incontrast,poorleadersingratiatethemselveswiththoseabovetheminthehierarchyandhangtheirsubordinatesouttodry,eventhoughtheymaybecarryingouttheirdutiesinthecorrectmanner.Thelattertypeofleadership(orlackthereof)isacharacteristicofthemanagerialcultureandnotofthescientificculture.

Although not directly related to the chapter topic, it may beopportunetofollowthereferencetoemissiontradingbyreferringtothecontroversialtopicofclimatechange.Thereisstrongopinionthat there is a significanthumancontribution to warmingof theplanet.ItisinterestingtoquestionwhetherthishasthestatusofascientifictheoryaccordingtothecriteriaproposedbyKarlPopper,discussedinChapter3.Thisisnottoquestionwhetherthetheoryiscorrectornotbuttoexaminehowwellithasbeentestedasasci-entifictheory.It iswidelyacceptedthathumaneffectsonclimateisacomplexissue.Muchevidencehasaccumulatedwhichcanberationalized on the basis that emissions resulting from humanactivityarecausinganincreaseinglobaltemperature.Buthasanyexperimentbeendonewiththeaimofrefutingthistheory?Itdoesnot necessarily need tobe a newexperiment. Once a theory hasbeen proposed, certain predictions logically follow. It is possibletotestpredictionsbymakingobservationsonwhathashappened


60


inthepast.Thequestionposediswhetheranyrefutabletestshavebeenmadeorwhetheralltheobservationsthatsupportthetheoryaresimplyconfirmationsofpreviousobservationsinthesameman-nerasthoseofAdler’spsychologicaltheory(see Chapter3).Ifnot,itcanonlybeconsideredtobesimilartothemythsorprecursorsofscientifictheoriesasdescribedbyPopper.Aninterestingexperi-mentthatcouldserveto test thetheorywasoutlinedbyMichaelAsteninanarticleentitled“CSIROShouldEstablishIfThereWasMedievalWarmingDown-Under.”*ThisrelatestowhathasbeenreferredtoastheMedievalWarmPeriod(MWP)thatissupposedtohavespannedarangeoftimebetweenthe9thand15thcentu-ries.ThereissomeevidenceinpartsoftheNorthernHemispherethat the rate of warming and temperatures attained were simi-lar to what has been observed in recentdecades. Asten has pro-posedtocarryoutastudyof fossils,cavedeposits,andtree-ringrecordsfromtropicaltoAntarcticAustraliaandterritoriestotestwhetherthewarmingevidencewasaglobalphenomenon.IfthisstudywouldshowasimilarwarmingperiodtotheMWP,thenthebasisofpresentbeliefthathumancontributionsarecausingtoday’swarmingwouldbeundermined.If theexperimentsfailedtoshowthis, it could thenbe takenasa failed refutation,and the theoryof human effects would be corroborated and emerge stronger.Asten suggested that this is an opportunity for CSIRO and theAustralianBureauofMeteorologytocarryoutthework.BasedonthepronouncementsofCSIROtopmanagement to theeffect thatthe theoryhasalreadybeen established, it seemsdoubtful if thesuggestionwouldbetakenup.

A False Premise

The notion that business management principles can be appliedtoscientificresearchisbasedonafalsepremise.Thepremisethatthe performance of all organizations can be optimized by apply-ing generic management theory is erroneous in the case of scien-tificresearch.InatranscriptfromThe World Todayentitled“CSIRO

*Asten, Michael, “CSIRO Should Establish If There Was Medical WarmingDown-Under,”The Australian,May13,2010(www.theaustralian.com.au/news/.../story-e6frg6zo-1225865724876).


61


Resembles Public Corporation: Leading Scientist,” David Markreported that former CSIRO scientist Hugh Tyndale-Biscoe said,“I emembersomeyearsagowhenwewerestartingtoberedirectedin CSIRO and somebody said to me in the administration ‘Whatwillyoubedoingnextyear?’AndIsaid‘Well,inthewordsoftheNobelLaureate,Szent-Gyorgi,ifI knewwhatIwasdoingnextyearitwouldn’tbeworthdoingbecauseitwouldmeanthatitwaspedes-trianstuff.’”*Thisistheessenceofthereasonwhyscientificresearchcannotberunbybusinessmanagementprinciples.

Performance Criteria for Scientists

Theperformance criteria for technical and research staff in someresearch organizations are formulated by administrators. At thebeginning of the review period, staff members are required todocument such things asobjectives, tasks to be performed, time-lines,milestones,andexpectedoutcomes.Attheendofthereviewperiod,theexpectedoutcomesandmilestonesareevaluatedagainsttheobjectives.Althoughsomeflexibilitymaybeallowed,thisratherrigid framework conflicts with the way that scientific researchshouldproceedaccordingtoastatementbyAlbertSzent-Gyorgiinregardtograntproposals.Inanarticleentitled“ResearchGrants,”Szent-Gyorgi(1974)wrote,

Researchmeansgoing into theunknown,which demandsapioneering spirit.This spirit isnowstrangled by theway inwhich themain federalbiomedicalgrantingagency, theU.S.National InstituteofHealth(NIH)distributes itsgrants.Theunknown is unknown because one does not know what isthere. If one knows what one will do and find in it, then itisnotresearchanymoreanditisnotworthdoing.TheNIHwantsdetailedprojects,wantsapplicants totellexactlywhattheywilldoandfindduringthetenureoftheirgrants,whichexcludesunexpecteddiscoveriesonwhichprogressdepends.(p.41)

*Mark,David,“CSIROResemblesPublicCorporation:LeadingScientist,”The World Today (ABCLocalRadio)(Transcript),July4,2005(www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1406264.htm).


62


The same reasoning applies to the performance reviews ofresearchscientists.Foranyproject,aresearcherneedstobeginwithgoals,buttheseneedtobeflexiblesothatwhennewinsightsintotheproblemaregained,thedirectionoftheresearchcanbeeasilychanged.Thisisnotpossiblewiththerigidstructureimposedbymanagerialism.Asaresult,scientistsareoftenstraightjacketedintheir projects. When it comes to their performance reviews, theyare locked into the tasks tobe performed and the time lines andtrytofitthemilestonesandconclusionstotheexpectedoutcomesinorder toobtainasuccessfulevaluation.Theircreativity is thusstifled,and theresearchbecomespedestrian.

Influence of Managerialism on Scientists

Confirmation of the inappropriateness of applying managementideologytoscientificresearchcomesfromthelossofmoraleandjobsatisfactionandthesteepincreaseinstresswithitsaccompany-ing health problems suffered by CSIRO staff since the adventof managerial policies (Rees, 1995). The problems stem from anunhealthy work environment. Diane Cory (1998), in an articleentitled “The Killing Fields: Institutions and the Death of OurSpirits,”wrotethefollowing:

There is a lie that must be named and a truth that must betold.Ourinstitutionsarekillingourspirits.Weareallowingittohappen.Inexchangeforanillusionofpowerandcontrol,safetyandsecurity,wehavebetrayedoursoulsbecauseweareafraid. We are afraid to think for ourselves inside organiza-tions.Weareafraidofourbossesandourbosses’bosses.Weareafraidofourcolleaguesandwhattheymightsayandhowtheymightbetrayusinmeetingsorbehindourbacks.Weareafraidwewon’tmeetourdeadlines.Weareafraidofforeigncompetitors.Weareafraid to“dreamgreatdreams.” Weareafraidtobekind.

This, I believe, is an apt description of the working environ-mentthathasbeenfoistedonCSIROasaresultoftheimpositionof managerialism.


63


Inthemid-1990s,anactiveforumwasestablishedontheWebinwhich CSIRO staff contributed, mainly to air their dissatisfactionwiththecurrenttrends.Nearlyallthecontributionshadaconsistentthemeinwhich“top-downmanagement,”“commandandcontrol,”and“emperorswithnoclothes”wererecurrentphrases.Thehopewasexpressedthatwhenthenewchiefexecutiveofficer(CEO)wasappointed,thepresenttrendwouldbehalted,andtherewouldbeareturntosanemanagement.Thiswasnottobe.Contributionstotheforumbegantodryup.Someoftheactivecontributorsretiredorresigned,otherswereretrenched,andsomeweretakenouttolunchbymanagement.Soonafter,acolleaguefromanotherCSIROdivi-sionwhohadleftbeforeIdidtotakeauniversityposition,madeaninterestingobservation.Whenhereturnedtovisithisolddivisionashorttimelater,heremarkedthathefeltthathehadenteredthe“landofthelivingdead.”TheKillingFields,soaptlydescribedbyDianeCory,hadtakentheirtoll.Spiritshadbeencrushed.Peopledidnotwishtoriskunemploymentbyrockingtheboat.Manyhadtosupportfamilies,sothiswastheirpriority.

InmyfinalyearsatCSIRO,Iexperiencedfirsthandtheinfluenceofmanagerialismonscientificresearch.Hierarchicalstructurewasfirmly embedded. Below the chief and assistant chiefs came theprogramleader,thenasuccessionofsubprogramleadersandprojectleaders.Thesewerenotappointedthroughopencompetition.Theywere not chosen because they were the best scientists, but werechosenmoreonthebasisthattheywouldfitwell intoacorporatesystem. It was no coincidence that many were characterized byhavingexcessively largeegos,which,Ibelieve, isapredominantlymalecharacteristic.Althoughdesignatedas“leaders,”inmyopinion,manyweremanagerswhooftenusedtheirstatustosubjugatesub-ordinates and enhance personal ambitions. Of course, ego energyisnecessary,as pointedoutbySchuster(1998),becausewithoutit,apersonwouldbeineffectual.Schustersuggeststhatahumanpersonisacombinationofegoandself.Whatis importantistohavetherightbalancesoas toavoid theextremesofanout-of-control egothatmakesapersonunbearabletoworkwithoranegosolackingastoreduceapersontoawimp.

Onceamanagementcultureisentrenched,itsnatureissuchthatit isdifficult tobringaboutchange.Organizationsusuallyhaveamixture of individuals who respond in different ways. Some see


64


thatthingsarewrongbutaretooapatheticortooafraidtoact.Someareopportunistswhocurryfavorwiththemanagersbecausetheyknowthatbyactingaslackeys,theywillberewarded,ashappensinalltotalitarianregimes.Therearealsothosewhoactasdoubleagents.Otherswouldliketomakechangesbutarepowerlesstodoso.Oneortwotrytochangethings,butbecausetheyarefew,theyare targetedbymanagementandcaneasilybeneutralized.Thus,there is usually little cohesion, and management finds it easy todivideandrule.Rees(1995)statedthat“Managerialfundamental-ismisapparentinitsdogma,intoleranceofcritics,andgratitudeforcompliantstaff”(p.25).ThisistheexactoppositeofwhatisinherentinthescientificmethodasdiscussedinChapter3.Wethushavetheparadoxofascientificorganizationunderthecontrolofaculturethatisalientoscience.Itshouldbemadeclearthatthosewhohaveacceptedandappliedthebusinessmanagementideologytoscien-tificresearchhavenotallbeengraduatesfrombusinessmanagementschools.Manywhohavehelpedtoimposetheideologyhavebeengraduates from university science departments. We need to askwhat iswrongwith ouruniversity sciencedepartments that theyareturningoutpeoplewhodonotseemtounderstandscienceandarecontenttocontributetoitsdestruction.

The Risks of Corrupt Practices

Anotherconsequenceofarigidhierarchicalsystemistheopportu-nitiesitopensupforcorruptpractices.Thetop-downmanagementstructureisabletohideinjustices.Thepowerfulalwaysprotectthepowerful.Someenlightenedorganizationshaveaddedbottom-upevaluations, facilitating identification of corrupt or incompe-tent managers by subordinates. However, in organizations wheremanagerialism is entrenched, those who hold power are usuallynotpreparedtoriskthepossibilityofrelinquishinganypowerbyadoptingthisfairersystem.

Rather than continuing with a theoretical discussion, I willrecount my own experience in regard to promotion to illustratethe point.After repeated annual requests, I was finallygiven thego-ahead,andmycaseforpromotionwasputforwardbythechiefofthedivision.Thecaseproceededtothenexthigher(andnormallythe highest) level which was the institute. Following the meeting


65


of institutedirectors to review promotioncases, I receivedacon-gratulatoryletterfromoneoftherefereesofmycaseinformingmethat my institute director hadsent him a letter thanking him forhisinputandinforminghimthatmypromotionhadbeenrecom-mended. At that time, CSIRO was undergoing a change in struc-ture.Alevelofexecutiveabovetheinstituteshadbeenputinplace,andmyformerinstitutedirectorhadbeenelevatedtotheexecutivemanagementcouncil.Ilaterreceivedaletterfromhim(nowinthecapacityofexecutivemember)informingmethatmypromotionhadbeendenied.WhenIvisitedhimtoinquireaboutthedenial,hetoldmethatitwasbecauseofexternaladvice.Onpressinghimabouttheexternaladvice,Iwastoldthatitcamefromthechiefofmydivision.In other words,my promotioncasehad been put forward by thechief,ithadpassedtheinstitutelevel,beensentontotheexecutivecouncil,andthenbeenrejectedasaresultofexternaladvicefromthe chief. Obviously, the other members of the executive council,whowereentrustedtoupholdthehighidealsoftheorganization,hadnotbeenconcernedaboutthisabuseofdueprocess.

In thepreparationofmycase, Iput forwardthenamesof fourreferees.Whenthedivisionsubmittedmycase, twoof thenameswereused,andthedivisionincludedoneother.IwasnotconsultedtoseeifIapproved,althoughtheregulationsstatethatthisiswhatshouldhappen.Thispersonwassomeonewithwhomtheprogramleaderhadcloseties.Thereportfromthisrefereewashighlycom-plimentarybutincludedonenegativecomment,namelythatIhadnot shown leadership in the formation of a cooperative researchcenter.ThetruthwasthatIhadwishedtotakealeadershiprolebuthadbeenremovedbytheprogramleader.Asinglenegativecom-mentinarefereereportoftenresultsinrejectionofacase.Althoughitdidnothavethisresultattheinstitutelevel,itwastobemadeuseofbymy“opponents”whenIlodgedanappeal.

Priortotheappealhearing,theprogramleaderinformedmethatatleastoneoftheappealcommitteewouldnotbeonmyside.Ididnottakemuchnoticeofthisremarkatthetime,asIhadnotatthatstagebeeninformedofthecompositionofthecommittee.Onthedayoftheappealhearing,thechief,assistantchief,andprogramleaderalltraveledfromCanberratoSydneytoparticipate,andeachgavenegativeinputs.Theappealcommitteeconsistedoffourmembers:the chairperson and three members. Because a senior promotionwasbeingconsidered,oneofthecommitteemembershadtohold


66


thepositionofchiefofadivision.When thecommitteemetafterthehearing,theycouldnotreachanagreementandsodecidedtosubmittworeports.Onereport,termedthemajority report,signedby three membersof the committee, stated that the requirementsforpromotiontothenextlevelhadbeenfulfilledandrecommendedthepromotion.Theotherreport,termedtheminorityreport,signedby the divisional chief, recommended against promotion. I willleaveittothereadertoconnectthedots.IwaslateradvisedbytheCEOthattheappealhadbeenunsuccessfulandthatmoreweighthadbeengiventotheopinionsoftwochiefs(oneamemberoftheappealcommitteeandtheotherthechiefofmydivision).Neitherof these chiefs had any understanding of my research, whereasthe other three committee members did have some knowledge.AlthoughIprotested,theCEOadvised,inaletterthatarrivedovertwomonthslatersentbysurfacemail,thathewasnotpreparedtochangehis decision.

I have recounted my experiences to alert younger scientists tothedishonestythatcanbefoundinhigh-levelmanagementandthecontemptfordueprocessthatcanoccurinasystemwheremanage-rialismoperates.Myadviceinthisclimateisthatoneshouldalwayslookforthegoodinpeoplebutwiththequalificationnottobenaïveandtoalwaysbereadytodealwithcorruptbehavior.WhenIwaspreparingmypromotioncase,Iwasgivenaccesstopreviouscasesat thesame level thathadbeenput forward in thedivision.One,inparticular,attractedmyattention. Itwasoneinwhich thecasewasbasedontheintroductionof“newgenes”thatwouldrevolu-tionizetheindustry.Nosuchgenesexisted;itwaspurelyfictitious.Still,thosewhodeliberatedonthecasewouldnotknowthat,anditwouldhavebeenashametopermitthisfacttospoilwhatwasanexcellentpromotioncase.

Schuster (1998), in an article entitled “Servants, Egos and Shoe-shines: A World of Sacramental Possibility,” paraphrases RobertoAssaglioli,afamousItalianpsychologistandvisionary,asaskingthequestion,“Whyisitthattrulygoodpeopleseemnottobepowerfulandthetrulypowerfulseemnot tobegood”(p.273).Asimplisticanswertothisquestioninregardtosciencemaybethatgoodsci-entistsare dedicated to theirprofessionandarenot too interestedinpower.On theotherhand,thosewhoattainpowerarethosewhorelentlesslyseekit.Ihaveobservedthatthesepeoplestrivetoalwayswin.Ifwinningcancomebyfairmeans,thatisfine,butifnot,other


67


meanswillberesortedto.Winningisalwaysthegoal,whetheritbetoreachapositionofpowerortocomeoffbestinapersonalconflict.

Managerial bosses think they know how to get to the bottomlinebasedonoutcomesthathadbeenexpected,milestonesthathadbeenpredicted,andtimelinesthathadbeenstrictlyadheredto.Itisoflittleimportancetosomeofthemifthisbottomlineisachievedinaworkingenvironmentcharacterizedbydemoralization,treachery,mistrust,andlackofhumor.Whatifthingshadbeendifferentinthepastfewdecades?WhatifCSIROhadbeenpresidedoverbyagov-ernmentwithanunderstandingofscienceandthevisionoftheonein1949whentheorganizationwasformedandbyaministerwiththe statesman-like qualities of CSIRO’s first minister, R.G. Casey?Whatifscientistshadbeenallowedtousetheircreativetalentstochange direction and follow insights that could have culminatedinunexpecteddiscoveriesofmajorimportance?Whatiflong-termresearchforthepublicgoodbyscientistswhohadachievedinter-nationalprestigehadbeenstronglysupported?Whatifthiscouldhave been done in an atmosphere of collegiality, kindness, andhumor?Whatthenwouldhavebeenthebottomline?Themanagerswouldnotbeabletoanswerthis,andnoneofuswilleverknow.

Coping with Effects of Managerial Stress

Nodoubt,therearemanyresearchscientistsinasituationinwhichtheyfeeloppressedbythose in theirmanagerialhierarchywhoareoftennotconcernedwiththewelfareoftheirsubordinates.Insuchasituation,thebestadviceistoleaveandfindanotherposi-tion.This,however,isusuallynotverypracticaladvice.Researchscientists are highly specialized. It is difficult to find anotherpositionthatmatchestheirexpertise.Untiloneisfound,itisnec-essarytofindwaystobestcopewiththesituation.Studiesofthereactionsofstaffindifferentoccupationshavefoundthatwhenacompanyislikelytoshutdownoremployeesareunderthethreatofretrenchment,thosewhocopebestarethosewhocontinuetofindmeaningintheirwork.Unliketheircolleagues,whoresignthemselvestotheirfateandsitarounddespondentlywaitingforthedayofexecution,thosewithamorepositiveattitudeshutoffalotofwhatisgoingonaroundthemandthrowthemselvesintotheirwork.Inthecaseofscientists,thismeanscontinuingtofocus


68


theirmindsontheproblemsbeingtackled,carryingoutexperi-ments and publishingpapers. Even if they do lose their jobs inthefuture,theywillhaveutilizedtheirtimeproductively,whichwillbebeneficialfortheircareers.Itmaybethattheywillneedto apportion a certain percentage of their time to dealing withproblemsthrustuponthembytheirmanagers.Sometimes,itcanbeabit likea chessgame. Itmayrequiredevelopmentof skillsinescapingfrom“check.”Theonlydifferenceisthatunlikeinachessgame,itisonlypossibletodefend,nottoattack.

ReferencesCory,D.1998.TheKillingFields:InstitutionsandtheDeathofOurSpirits.In

Insights on Leadership. Service, Stewardship, Spirit, and Servant Leadership (LarryC.Spears,ed.),JohnWiley&Sons,NewYork,pp.209–215.

Lee,K.E.1998.AHistoryoftheCSIRODivisionofSoils1927–1997.CSIROLandandWaterAdelaideTechnicalReport43/98,November1998.

Rees,S.1995.TheFraudandtheFiction.InThe Human Costs of Managerialism. Advocating the Recovery of Humanity (S.ReesandG.Rodley,eds.),PlutoPress,Sydney,Australia,pp.15–27.

Schuster,J.P.1998.Servants,Egos,andShoeshines:AWorldofSacramentalPossibility. In Insights on Leadership. Service, Stewardship, Spirit, and Servant Leadership (Larry C. Spears, ed.), John Wiley & Sons, NewYork,pp.271–278.

Szent-Gyorgi,A.1974.“ResearchGrants.”Perspectives in Biology and Medicine18:41–43.

69



ABOATRACE

(www.wolfescape.com/Humour/Names.htm)

OnceuponatimeitwasresolvedtohaveaboatracebetweenaJapaneseteamandateamrepresentingtheN.H.S.Bothteamspracticedlongandhardtoreachpeakperformance.Onthebigdaytheywereasreadyastheycouldbe.

TheJapanesewonbyamile.AfterwardstheN.H.S.teambecameverydiscouragedbythe

resultandmoralesagged.Seniormanagementdecidedthatthereasonforthecrushingdefeathadtobefound,andaworkingpartywas setup to investigate theproblemand recommendappropriateaction.

TheirconclusionwasthattheJapaneseteamhadeightpeo-plerowingandonepersonsteering,whereastheN.H.S.teamhadeightpeoplesteeringandonepersonrowing.

Seniormanagementimmediatelyhiredaconsultancycom-panytodoastudyontheteam’sstructure.Millionsofpoundsandseveralmonthslatertheyconcludedthat“toomanypeo-pleweresteeringandnotenoughrowing.”

TopreventlosingtotheJapanesenextyear,theteamstruc-ture was changed to three “Assistant Steering Managers,”three“SteeringManagers,”one“ExecutiveSteeringManager”and a “Director of Steering Services.” A performance andappraisal system was set up to give the person rowing theboatmoreincentivetoworkharder.

ThenextyeartheJapanesewonbytwomiles.Followingthis,theN.H.S.laidofftherowerforpoorperfor-

mance,soldoffallthepaddles,cancelledallcapitalinvestmentfornewequipment,andhalteddevelopmentofanewcanoe.ThemoneysavedwasusedtofundhigherthanaveragepayawardstoSeniorManagement.


70


MCKINSEYREPORTONAPERFORMANCEOFTHEBERLINPHILHARMONIC

(www.year01.com/forum/issue1.htm)

Thefouroboeplayersdonothavemuchtodoforquitealongperiod.Thispartshouldbeshortenedandtheworkshouldbeequallydistributedonallmembersoftheorchestrainordertoavoidpeakloads.Thetwelveviolinsplayallthesamemelody.That is an unnecessaryparallel work. This group should bemadedrasticallysmaller.Incaseahighervolumeofsoundispreferredthiscanbeachievedalsobyanelectronicamplifier.Toplaypartswhichinclude1/32notesrequiresalargeworkeffort. It is recommendedtocondenseall thesenotes to1/16notes. Then even students of music and less qualified musi-cianscouldbeemployed.Insomepassagesthereistoomuchrepetition.Thefullscoreshouldinthisrespectbethoroughlyrevised—what is the use of it if the horn repeats a passagewhichhasbeenplayedalreadybytheviolins?

If all those unnecessary passages are eliminated then theconcert,whichtakesuptotwohoursintime,willlastapproxi-matelytwentyminutes.Thisimpliesthattheintermissioncanbeomitted.Ifallthesemeasuresdoreducedemand,thenpartoftheconcerthallcouldbeclosedwhichsavesmoneyforper-sonnel,electricity,heating,andsoforth.

71


Chapter 6LeadershipinScience

Ifwearetorecoverfromthenegativeinfluencesthatmanagerialismhashadonscientificresearch,weneedleaderstoshowthewayback.Thetermleaderconjuresupdifferentimagesfordifferentpeople.TheserangefromruthlesstyrantslikeHitler,Stalin,andPolPottotheoppo-siteendof thespectrumwherewefindtheservantleaderexempli-fiedbyRobertGreenleaf.DianeCory(1998),inanarticleentitled“TheKillingFields:InstitutionsandtheDeathofOurSpirits”(mentionedinChapter5),writes“Ibelievethatbylivinginfearandacceptingitasthenorminourinstitutions,wehaveconfusedpositionsofauthoritywithleadersandabuseofpowerwithleadership”(p.212).Everyoneinoursocietycanbea leader. In thescientificcommunity,someofthosewhohaveassumedpositionsofauthorityarenotleaders,theyare often just “powertrippers.” On the other hand, some who havenopositionofauthorityareleaders,settinganexampletoothersbytheir integrityandhonestytowardtheirworkandindealingswithcolleagues.Leadershipisnotsomethingthatcanbeeasilydefined,butusuallyitispossibletorecognizewhenitispresentandwhenitisnot.

DuringoneofthemanyrestructuringsintheCommonwealthSci-entificandIndustrialResearchOrganization(CSIRO)thatI referredtointhepreviouschapter,twodivisionsweretobeamalgamated.The chiefs of these two divisions had a difference of opinion onhowthisshouldbedoneandwenttoseethechiefexecutiveofficer(CEO). The CEO promptly told them to go away and come backonce they had agreed on the new structure. A colleague of mineremarked that thiswasanexampleof leadership.EvidentlywhathadimpressedmycolleaguewasthedecisivenessoftheCEO.Thisattributeofsolvingproblemsbymakingquickandfirmdecisionsiswhatisregardedbymanyasstrongleadership.Forme,thisexamplewastheantithesisofleadership.Agoodleaderwouldhaveengagedthetwochiefs,initiallyseparately,tounderstandthepositionfromwhereeachwascoming.Then,heorshewouldhavetriedtonegoti-ateacompromisethatwouldbeacceptabletobothsoastoresultinawin-winsituation.Todothisrequirescertainskills,but,aboveall,


72


thisrequiresbeingabletolistenreceptivelyandtoempathizewithothers. In environments where managerial tactics operate, theseattributesarenoteasilyfound.

Mentoring

Atsomestageintheircareers,scientistswillalmostcertainlybeexpected toact as mentors for less-experienced colleagues. Thismaymeaninteractingwithcolleaguesinthesameorinadiffer-entinstitute.Itmayinvolvesomeoneseekingadviceinregardtointerpretationoftheirdataoronhowtoproceedwithhisorherproject. Most scientists have a generous spirit and are happy topass on the benefits of their experience, finding this rewarding.More formal mentoring involves participating in an organizedmentor/protégéprogramrunbyanorganizationorservingasamajoradvisor foragraduateresearchstudent. It is in this lattercapacityasadvisor toabudding researcher that Iwould like topassonsomethoughts.Ofcourse,therearenorulesforthis,andtheapproachofasupervisormayvarygreatlydependingontheindividualandalsoon thementee.Later Iwill saya littlemoreabouttheroleofaleader,butfirstIwouldsuggestthatthemostessentialqualityisintegrity.Thestudentneedstohaveconfidencethattheadvisorwillalwaysbehonestandwillalwaysbesupport-ive.Ihavehearditsaidthatwhereastudentbehavesbadlysuchasbybeinguncooperative,dishonest,orjustlazy,thesupervisorshouldkeepawrittenrecordofthestudent’stransgressions,pre-sumablysoastouseitwhenitcomestoafinalshowdown.It isabitlikekeepingarecordofyourspouse’sbadbehaviorsothatyouwillhaveitreadywhenthedivorceproceedingsbegin.Thisiscompletelyunacceptable.Itisessentialthattherebearelationshipofcompletetrustbetweenadvisorandstudent.Evenifastudenterrsinbehavior,thesupervisormustneverbetraythetrust.

Supervision of Research Students

Inauniversitysciencedepartment,afacultymemberwillusuallybe in chargeofa laboratoryand willbe expected toact asmajoradvisorforanumberofgraduateresearchstudents.Thisposition

Leadership in Science

73


carriescertainresponsibilities.Thesupervisorhastheresponsibil-ityofensuringthatthestudentsareprovidedwiththeconditionsrequiredtocarryouttheirwork,culminatinginsuccessfulcomple-tionoftheirpostgraduatedegree.Itisthedutyofthesupervisortoensure that the student receivessufficient remuneration soasnottoexperienceeconomichardship.Thismayentailseekingexternalfunding tosupport the research.The studentshouldbeprovidedwith a viable research project and the laboratory facilities andequipmentneededtoperformthework.Next,thesupervisorshouldendeavor to create an environment conducive to research. Thisincludes stimulating the students and encouraging harmoniousrelationsbetweenthedifferentmembersofthegroup.Thiscanbehelpedbyorganizingsmallsocialfunctionsinthelaboratory,suchas lunchesor teas.Short, informalmeetingsshouldbeheldregu-larlyforstudentstoraiseanyproblemstheymayhaveencounteredsuchasequipmentthatisnotworking.Itcanalsobeanopportunitytogiveshortsummariesoftheirresearchprojectsandtheobstaclestheyareencountering,withthegoalofgettingfeedbackfromtheirfellowstudents.Allthishelpstofostercollegiality.Theimportanceof thechoiceofaviableresearchareacannotbeoveremphasized.Students have a finite time to complete the research, so it can bedemoralizing to have to spend long periods banging their headsagainstbrickwalls.Tobeginwith,thesupervisorusuallywillneedtosuggesttheproblemandgivesomeideashowtotackleit.Astimegoeson,studentsmaytakeanactiveroleand,ideally,willproceedtoformulatetheirownoriginalapproaches.

The way research students are supervised varies greatly fromone supervisor toanother. Some supervisors placegoals for theirstudentsandthencoercethemtoachievethesegoals.Thisresem-bles somewhat the managerial system described in the previouschapter.Ratherthangivinganopinionastowhatisthebestwaytooverseestudents,IwillbrieflydescribethewayIhavetriedtoguidestudentsandthereasonsforadoptingtheapproach.Ibelievethatresearchisanactivitythatrequiresacertainamountoftranquility,freefromtoomuchexternalpressure.IhavebeencriticizedbecauseIdidnotsupervisestudentscloselyenough.Iunderstandhowthisperceptionmayhavearisen,butI thinkit isonethat fails totakeintoaccountthetruenatureofresearch.Iheardoncethroughthegrapevinethatoneofmystudents,whowasnothappywithprog-ress,hadsaidthatIdidnotpushmystudents.Thiswasquitetrue.


74


I believethatanessentialattributethataresearchermustdevelopin his or her training is self-motivation. Once someone becomesself-motivated,thedrivewillthencomefromwithinandnotfromoutside,anditwillbeverymuchmoreeffective.Ifsomeonecarry-ingoutresearchfeelsthatheorshehasnotprogressedasmuchorasquicklyasexpected,itisillogicaltoseektoattachtheblametosomeoneelse.Personswhochoosescientificresearchasacareeranddonotbecomeself-motivatedmayneedtorethinktheirvocation.Self-motivation in research means developing a burning passionto tackletheunknownto thepoint that it isalmostanobsession.Of course, this is meant in a positive sense and does not meanadoptinganyunhealthyaspectsofobsessivebehavior.

Therearenorulesfortheregularityofdiscussionsbetweenadvi-sorandstudent. Itwillvary.Somestudents like tohave frequentdiscussions.Othersprefertohaveagooddealoffreedomtofollowtheir leads and have something tangible before talking to theiradvisorabouttheirprogress.Theadvisormustalwaysbevigilanttoensurethatalongperiodbetweenmeetingsdoesnotmeanthatthestudentisbaffledanddoesnotknowhowtocontinue.Ibelievethattheapproachofanadvisortodiscussionswithstudentsshouldbesimilar to thatadoptedbyapsychoanalyst.The importanceofresearchstudentsbeingable toarriveat theirown insights intoaproblemisoftennotappreciated.Whenstudentspresentresultsandareunsurehowtointerpretthemandhowtoproceed,acommonmistakeisforthemoreexperiencedadvisortojumpinandprovideexplanations. This prevents students from developing their ownideas.Whentheadvisorseesthesolutiontoaproblemanddoesnotconveyit,thisgivesthestudentanopportunitytoarriveatthesolu-tion.Thismayhappenquicklyormaytakesometime.Patienceanddisciplinearethereforerequiredonthepartoftheadvisor.If thispracticeisfollowed,itbecomessecondnaturefortheadvisor.Thisdoesnotmeanthattheadvisorshoulddeliberatelywithholdinfor-mation.Itmeansthattheadvisormaypointthestudentintherightdirectionbysuggestingapaperorasectionfromatextbook,withoutexplicitly providing the answer. In this way, it allows students toarrive at a clearer appreciation of the problem and gives them asenseofachievementandtheconfidencetotacklefutureproblems.Therehavebeenoccasionswhenstudentshavecometodiscusstheirresearchand,attheendofthesession,havebecomeanimatedandthankedmeprofuselyforhelpingtheirunderstanding.Ihaveonly


75


satandlistenedwithoutcontributinganything.Bytalkingaboutthesubject,theyhavebeenabletoclarifytheirthoughts.

WhenIretiredfromtheuniversity, twoofmyformergraduatestudents traveled to see me. They both had recently married andbrought their wives. They kindly invited me and my wife for adinner.Duringreminiscences,theyremarkedthatoftenbeforestu-dentswenttomeetwithme,theywouldbeagitatedandworried,butafterthemeeting,theywouldappearsereneandhappy.ThiswasacompletesurprisetomeasIhadneverdeliberatelysetoutwiththatpurpose.Regardlessofwhetheritwastrueornot,Ithinkmostadvisorswouldwishtobeabletohavethiseffectontheirstudents.

Qualities Needed to Lead Scientific Research

Inthepreviouschapter,Idiscussedafewofthetrendsinleadershipofascientificorganizationwhichhaveresultedfromtheadoptionofideologybasedprimarilyoneconomicoutcomes.Thishaspro-duced demoralization, stress, and accompanying health problemsforscientists.Itisobvioustomanythatthereneedstobearever-salofthesetrendsbyrestoringhumanwell-being.Argumentsastowhythemanagerialcultureisnotappropriateforscientificinquirytoflourishwereputforwardinthepreviouschapter.SuggestionsastohowthismaybeaccomplishedfororganizationsingeneralhavebeenoutlinedinthebookeditedbyReesandRodley(1995).Someofthequalitiesneededtoleadscientificresearchareasfollows:

1.Broadvisionandanunderstandingofscience,includingitsphilosophyandhistory

2.Recognition that the greatest asset in research is not themillion dollar grant or instrument but the individualscientists,becauseitistheircreativitythatproducesoriginalideasthatcanleadtoadvancesinknowledge

3.Concern for the well-being of scientists in their charge,meaningthattheyshouldbetreatedfairlyandequallywith-outthecronyismandfavoritismthatissometimesevidentwheretheruthlessmanagerialstyleoperates;agoodscien-tific leader works to enhance the careers of subordinates,whereaspoorleaderstrampleontheirbestinterests

4.Minimization of hierarchy, but where it exists, the mostgiftedscientistsshouldbegiventheleadershiproles


76


Servant Leadership

The third of the above qualities emphasizes leaders’ concerns fortheirsubordinates,anattributethatleadsnaturallytoaconceptthathasachievedprominenceinrecentdecades,thatofservantleader-ship. This was introduced by Robert Greenleaf and described inseveralpublications(GreenleafandSpears,2002;Frick,2004).Sincehispassingonin1990,othershavecontinuedhispioneeringworkat the Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership in Indianapolis,Indiana. The ideas of servant leadership have been disseminatedbyothers in theformofarticlesandconferencepresentationsandhavebeenintroducedintosomeorganizations.Briefly,theconceptisthattheservantleaderisaservantfirstbutlaterchoosestoaspiretoleadership.GreenleafreceivedinspirationfromreadingHermanHesse’sThe Journey to the East(1956).Inthisstory,agroupofmensetoutonaspiritualjourneysponsoredbyanOrder.Oneofthegroup,Leo,wastheservantwhosustainedothermembersofthegroupbyhis spirit.The journeywasgoingwelluntilLeodisappeared.Thegroupthenfellintodisarray,andthejourneywasabandoned.Later,thenarratorofthestory,oneofthegroup,afterwanderingforyears,istakenintotheOrderthathadsponsoredthejourney.HethenmetupagainwithLeowhomhehadknownasaservantbutnowdiscov-eredthathewastheguidingspiritoftheOrderanditsnobleleader.

The essential feature of servant-leadership is that the leaders’experiencesasservantsfitthemtounderstandhowtoserveothers.Agoodservanttriestoinsurethatotherpeoples’needsarebeingserved.Inscience,itfollowsthattheleadergivesprioritytothebestinterests of the scientists. This means trying to insure the condi-tions for each scientist’s creative talent to flourish and to removeobstaclestothisobjective.AccordingtoGreenleaf,thebesttestofservantleadershipis“Dothoseservedgrowaspersons?Dothey,while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autono-mous,morelikelythemselvestobecomeservants?”Inregardtothefuture,Greenleaf(1998)believedthat

Anewmoralprincipleisemerging,whichholdsthattheonlyauthoritydeservingone’sallegianceisthatwhichisfreelyandknowinglygrantedbytheledtotheleaderinresponseto,andinproportionto,theclearlyevidentservantstatureoftheleader.Those who choose to follow this principle will not casually


77


accept theauthorityofexisting institutions.Rather, theywillfreelyrespondonlyto individualswhoarechosenasleadersbecausetheyareprovenandtrustedasservants.Totheextentthatthisprincipleprevailsinthefuture,theonlyviableinstitu-tionswillbethosethatarepredominantlyservant-led.(p.17)

Ofcourse,theseideaswillbevigorouslyopposedbythosewhobelieveincoercivepowerandcontrolratherthanatrustbasedonmutualaccord.Noteveryonecanfit intoa servant-leader culture,andthiswasadmittedbyGreenleaf.Inhisbiographicalnotes(citedbyFrick,1998),hereferstohisforemantellingayoungworker,“Youknow,ifafellowisanS.O.B.,deepdowninside,hehadjustbettergoaheadandbeone,becauseifhetriestobesomethingelse,hewilllikelybeseenasbothahypocriteandanS.O.B.,andthat’sworse”(pp.354–355).

The Inverted Pyramid

The concept of servant leadership leads to a structure that is, tosome extent, opposite to that found in most organizations. TheusualstructurefororganizationsisapyramidinwhichtheCEOisattheapex,andsuccessivelayersofmanagementmovedownwards.When it comes to matters of vision, mission, values, and settingof major goals, it is essential that the pyramid remains upright(Blanshard,1998).However,Blanshardsuggeststhattheimplemen-tationofpoliciescanoftenbemadeinabetterwayifthepyramidisinverted.Whenthishappens,thoseatthetopoftheorganizationbecomethosewhointerfacewiththecustomers.Thoseatthebottomofthepyramidarenowthetopmanagers.Theirroleisthentosup-port thoseat thecustomer interfaceandhelp themtoaccomplishtheirgoals.Thesegoalsaregenerallytoprovideexcellentservicetothecustomers.Wehaveallexperienced the frustrationofdealingwithbureaucracywhenwehavebeenunabletohaveourreasonablerequestssatisfiedbecausethepeoplewedealwitharefarremovedfromthetopmanagementandhavenoautonomy.

Letmerelateoneofmyexperiencesinthisregard.AcolleaguefromascientificinstituteinMexicoarrangedforhergraduatestu-dent to spend two months at my laboratory in the United Statesto gain experience in an experimental technique. Although the


78


immigrationdepartmenthadgivenassurancethatavisawouldbeissuedtothestudentintime,therewasanunexplainabledelayinprovidingit.Theresultwasthatthestudent’svisitwasdelayed,andshewasonlyabletospendtwoweeksintheUnitedStates.In ordertohavetherequiredequipmentandreagentsforthestudenttoworkwith,theMexicaninstituterequestedthatwearrangefortheirpur-chase through the U.S. university and they would reimburse us,whichtheydid.Thiswasdonetoavoidtheexpectedlongdelayinacquiringthegoods.Thestudent,however,didnothavethetimetousethematerialsandwasonlyabletogainsomepreliminarytrain-ing.Afterthestudentreturnedhome,weattemptedtoforwardthematerialstotheMexicaninstitute,whichwasfairastheyhadpaidfor them.Theuniversityadministrator sentmea two-pagee-mailexplainingwhyitwasnotpossibletosendgoodsthathadbeenpur-chasedthroughtheuniversitytoanotherinstitute.Itookthemattertomydepartmentheadwhosolvedtheprobleminaninstantandauthorizeddispatchofthegoods.TheyweresentoffbyFedExaftercomplyingwithall thepaperwork.Ontheirarrival inMexico,mycolleaguewenttotheairporttopickthemupbutwastoldthatshewouldbeunabletodosoasthereweretworeagentsthatwereonthelistofhazardouschemicals.Wescientistsusedthesechemicalsregularly,knewtheywerelistedashazardous,andwerecompletelyfamiliarwiththeprecautionsforusingthem.Thisexampleshowshow,ateverystep,guidelineswerefollowedblindlywithoutconsid-eringwhatwasjustandinthebestinterestsofthosewhowerebeingserved.Thoseprovidingservicecontinuedtodrawtheirregularsala-riesfor“doingtheirjob.”Incontrast,thosesupposedlybeingserved,werealldisadvantaged—thestudentbyalostopportunityandthetwosciencedepartmentsbyawasteoftheirpreciousresources.Byinvertingthepyramid,theemployeesattheinterfacewithcustomersarenowresponsibleforimplementationofpolicies.Theythengooutoftheirwaytobeofservice.Theroleofthemanagers,whoarenowlowerintheinvertedpyramid,istogivesupporttotheemployeesand insurethat theyaregiventheresources toserve theneedsofthecustomers.Undertheseconditions,commonsenseprevails,andfrustrationisreplacedbysatisfactionforthecustomer.

Althoughtheexamplegivenwasforbusinessadministration,thesameprinciplescanbeappliedtoascientificorganization.Theroleoftheleadersistogivesupporttothescientistsandinsurethattheyhavealltheresourcesandencouragementtousetheircreativetalents


79


topursueresearch.Thesatisfiedcustomerbecomesanappreciativepublicwhoselivesareenhancedbytheadvancesmadebyscience.

The Future

Willleadershipinscientificresearchchangeinthefutureand,ifso,how?Withthewisdomofhindsight, itiseasytounderstandhowthepresentorganizationofmanyscientificinstitutionshasevolved.Researchislargelydependentonfunding,asmostresearch,espe-ciallythatofalong-termnature,doesnotgenerateitsownfunding;although,ifsuccessful,itscostsmayeventuallyberecoupedmanytimesover.Mostfundingisprovidedbygovernmentsandindustrialcompanies.Governmentsareaccountabletotaxpayers,andcompa-niesareaccountabletoshareholders.Eachoftheseentitieshastheresponsibilitytoallocatethefundingtogivemaximumbenefit.Thisis indisputable. What are in dispute are the conditions placed onscientists,purportedlytoachievetheresearchgoals.Forexample,governmentrepresentativesprimarilycomefromprofessionsotherthan science and therefore do not have a deep understanding ofscience.Thepromisesofmanagerialideologyareappealing.Greaterefficiencyanddoingmorewithlessseemtobeplausiblegoals.Ifitcomeswithdemoralizationandanunpleasantworkenvironment,itmightbearguedthatthisisthecostofeconomicsuccess.Butiseconomicsuccessreallyachievedunderthesecircumstances?If thecreativity of scientists is curtailed, can optimum economic suc-cessresult? Ifnot, thentheargumentthatanunpleasantworkingenvironmentisthecost,breaksdown.Thepotentialadvantagesofscientific research in a freer environment are not quantified, andmanagerialprincipleshavenowayofestimatingit.

It is becoming increasingly recognized that the way scientificinstitutionsareruncannotbebasedsolelyoneconomics,althoughthisalwayshastobeanimportantcomponent.Anotherimportantconsideration is that scientists must be given the opportunity todevelop their fullpotential.Thus, therehas tobeanappropriatebalancebetweenstrategiestogiveeconomicsuccessandonesthatprovideaworkplaceconducivetothewell-beingoftheemployees.In the case of scientists, the work environment needs to empha-sizeempowermentofindividualsandbecharacterizedbypurposeand dignity. Younger scientists entering the profession or in the


80


earlystagesoftheircareersinheritthechallengetohelpcreatethisenvironment.AspointedoutbyJohnRenesch(1994),companiescan-notchangelong-establishedculturesunlesstheirleadersalsochange.Renesch (1994) states that “The modern business books are full ofattemptstotransformorganizationswithoutanymaterialchangebytheirchiefexecutivesorotherseniorpeople.Thenewleaderswillbepeopleofvision,whoinspireotherstobecomepartoftheirvision.They won’t convince or manipulate to recruit other people to jointhem;theywillattractthem,likeamagnet”(pp.2–3).RobertGreenleafhasalsogivensuggestionsonhowchangemustbeginbychangingoneselfifwearetomovetoorganizationswithhighideals.Serviceto others is at the heart of the servant-leader concept. However, togetthekindoftrustthatenablesanempowermentculturetothrive,it isnecessarynotonlytohaveindividualswhoaretrustworthyandwhose vision is shared with the organization, but to have a trust-worthyorganizationthatfostersandsupports empowerment.

References

Blanshard,K.1998.ServantLeadershipRevisited.InInsights on Leadership(LarryC.Spears,ed.),JohnWiley&Sons,NewYork,pp.21–28.

Corey,D.1998.TheKillingFields:InstitutionsandtheDeathofOurSpirits.In Insights on Leadership (Larry C. Spears, ed.), John Wiley & Sons,NewYork,pp.209–215.

Frick, D.M. 1998. Understanding Robert K. Greenleaf and ServantLeadership.InInsights on Leadership(LarrySpears,ed.),JohnWiley&Sons,NewYork,pp.353–358.

Frick,D.M.2004.Robert Greenleaf: A Life of Servant-Leadership,Berrett-Koehler,SanFrancisco,California.

Greenleaf,R.K.1998.Servant-Leadership.InInsights on Leadership (LarryC.Spears,ed.),JohnWiley&Sons,NewYork,pp.15–20.

Greenleaf,R.,andSpears,L.C.2002.Servant-Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness/Essays by Robert K. Greenleaf,editedbyLarryC.Spears,PaulistPress,Mahwah,NewJersey.

Hesse,H.1956.The Journey to the East.(TranslatedfromGermanbyHildaRosner.)Picador,NewYork.

Rees,S.,andRodley,G.1995.The Human Costs of Managerialism—Advocating the Recovery of Humanity,ChapterV,PlutoPress,Sydney,Australia.

Renesch, J. 1994. A Commitment to a Change in Context. In Leadership in a New Era: Visionary Approaches to the Biggest Crisis of Our Time(J. Renesch,ed.),NewLeadersPress,SterlingandStone,SanFrancisco,California,pp.1–5.

81


Chapter 7InsightsfromNotableScientists

Inpreviouschapters,welookedatthephilosophyofthescientificmethod and some of the attributes needed by research scientistsforasuccessfulcareer. In thischapter,wewill focusattentiononindividualscientistswhohaveattainedeminenceandtrytoobtainsomeinsightsintotheirsuccess.Thus,themainaimwillnotbetoattempt togivebiographicalsketchesbut to focusonsomeof theuniquefeaturesoftheircareersthatmightholdthesecretstotheirachievements.Itisinnowaymeanttobealistofthegreatestsci-entistsbutwillselectprimarilysomeofthosewhofittheobjective.Whenassessing theaccomplishmentsof scientists, it is importantto take into account the era in which they worked and thus theextent of knowledge at that time. Thus, it is unfair to play downtheachievementsofthosewhoworkedatearliertimesbasedontheunderstandings of today.Science progresses through building ontheadvancesmadebythosewhohavegonebefore.AsIsaacNewtonremarked,“If Ihaveseen further thanothers, it isbecauseIhavestoodontheshouldersofgiants.”*

Marie Curie (1867–1934)

MarieCurie(néeSkodlowska)grewupinPoland.Herfathertaughtmathematicsandphysics,andhergrandfatherhadbeenateacherinLublin.Herfamily,bothonherpaternalandmaternalsides,losttheirpropertyandfortunethroughpatrioticinvolvementinPolishnationaluprisings.ShewenttoParisin1890but,initially,couldnotafforduniversitytuition.ShereturnedtoWarsawin1891,tutoredforashorttime,andthenreturnedtoParisattheinvitationofhersister. After briefly staying with her sister, she rented a primitiveroom and proceeded with her studies in physics, chemistry, and

*MillardFillmore’sBathtub(timpanogos.wordpress.com/…/quote-of-the-moment-newton-giants),accessedSeptember2010.


82


mathematicsattheUniversityofParis(Sorbonne).Shestudieddur-ingthedayandtutored intheevenings,scarcelyabletoearnherkeep. She obtained a degree at the Sorbonne in mathematics in1894.ShereturnedtoPoland,believingshewouldbeabletoworkthereinherchosenfieldofstudy.However,shewasdeniedaplaceatKrakowUniversity,apparently because shewasa woman,andreturnedtoParis.

HercareerwasinfluencedbyBecquerel’sdiscoveryin1896thaturaniumemittedraysthatdidnotdependonanexternalsourceofenergybutseemedtoarisespontaneouslyfromtheuraniumitself.Shelookedintothisphenomenonasapotentialfieldofresearchforathesis.Forthestudy,sheusedanelectrometer,aninstrumentthathadbeeninventedbyhernewhusband,PierreCurie,andhisbrother15yearsearlier.Sheshowedthattheradioactivityofuraniumcom-poundsdependedonlyonthequantityofuraniumpresent,andthattheradiationcamefromtheuraniumatoms,animportantadvanceat that time. Uranium occurred naturally in two minerals: pitch-blendeandtorbernite(alsoknownaschalcolite).Itwasfoundthatpitchblende was about four times as radioactive as uranium, andtorbernitewastwiceasradioactive.Itwasdeducedfromthis thatthesetwomineralsmustcontainsmallquantitiesofsomeothersub-stancethatwasmoreactivethanuranium.PierreCuriejoinedhiswife in the work, and together, they announced in 1898 the exis-tenceofanelementthattheynamedpolonium(inhonorofhernativePoland).Inthesameyear,theyannouncedtheexistenceofasecondelementthattheynamedradium,foritsintenseradioactivity.

Pitchblende is a complex mineral, and the chemical separationof itsconstituentswasahugelyarduoustask.Poloniumwasrela-tivelyeasy,butradiumwasmoredifficult.Chemically,itresembledtheelementbarium,andthesetwoelementswerebothpresentinpitchblende.TheCuriesundertookthedauntingtaskofseparatingout radium salts by differential crystallization. The problem wasthat the concentration of radium in pitchblende was much lowerthanhadbeenanticipated.Fromatonofpitchblende,onetenthofa gramof radiumchloride was separated in1902. By1910, MarieCurie isolated the pure radium metal. In the meantime, her hus-bandhadbeenkilledinanunfortunatestreetaccidentin1906.In1903,theRoyalSwedishAcademyofScienceawardedPierreCurie,Marie Curie, and Henri Becquerel the Nobel Prize in physics fortheirresearchonradiation.In1911,MarieCuriewasawardedthe

Insights from Notable Scientists

83


NobelPrizeinchemistryfordiscoveryoftheelementsradiumandpolonium,theisolationofradium,andthestudyofitsnatureandcompounds.Thus,shebecamethefirstpersontohavebeenawardedNobel Prizes in two different sciences.She alsohad thehonorofbecomingthefirstfemaleprofessorattheUniversityofParis.

Charles Darwin (1809–1882)

Charles Darwin was born at Shrewsbury, England, the son of adoctor.HebegantostudymedicineatEdinburghbutdidnotpursuea medical career. He transferred to Cambridge to train for theministry.AtCambridge,hebefriendedJohnHenslow,abiologypro-fessor,andAdamSedgwick,ageologyprofessor,andwasmotivatedtobecomeinterestedinbiologyandgeology.ThroughtheinfluenceofHenslow,hewasinvitedtoaccompanyanexpeditionontheHMSBeagle,ashiporganizedbytheAdmiraltytochartthewatersoftheSouthSeas,underayoungcaptain,RobertFitzroy.The cruiseoftheBeagleextendedtoalmostfiveyears(1831to1836).Thegoodfacilitieson theshipand the timespentexploringnew landsgaveDarwina wonderful opportunity to make observations and to collectspecimens,whichformedthebasisforthetheorieshewastodevelopovermanyyearsafterthereturnoftheBeagletoEngland.Duringtheexpedition,Darwinspentmuchofthetimeonland,whiletheBeagle charteredthecoastsofSouthAmerica,surroundingislands,andasfaras Australia.

During the voyage of the Beagle, Darwin read avidly from thebooksintheship’slibraryaswellasthosehebroughtalonghimself.Onebook,CharlesLyell’sPrinciples of Geology(1830–1833),influencedhis thinking. Lyell proposed that the earth’s geology had changedgraduallyover longperiodsof timeasa resultofcumulative localeventssuchasearthquakes,volcaniceruptions,erosion,anddepositsofsediments.Thisdifferedfromthecurrentlyheldviewthatchangesoccurred through violent, short-lived events such as the raising ofmountains.Darwin’sobservations tended to confirmLyell’sviews.Forexample,inSaoTigre,avolcanicislandabout1800milessouth-westoftheCanaryIslands,hededucedfromthesequenceofsedi-mentsthattheisland’ssurfacehadbeenformedbyasuccessionofvolcanicevents,interspersedwithsubsidenceandbuildingupoveralongtime,andnotasingleviolentone.Hedid,however,disagree


84


withLyell’sopinionthatcoralreefswereformedbyvolcanicaction.He believed that they were formed by gradual changes resultingfromsubsidenceandelevationevents.Hepredictedthatifanislandsankbelowtheoceansurface,coralswouldcontinuegrowing,andareefwouldturnintoanatoll.LyellacceptedDarwin’sinterpretation,anditsvalidityhassincebeenconfirmedbysubsequentdrilling.

Hisgeologicalworkbroughthimrecognitioninscientificcircles,but the problem that particularly occupied Darwin’s attention wasthequestionofhowdifferentspeciesoforganismsoriginated.DuringhisvoyageontheBeagle,hewasintriguedbymanyobservations.Forexample,inSouthAmerica,hehadfoundfossilsofarmadillosthatwerenowextinctbutweresimilarbutnotidenticaltothosepresentlyexisting.InArgentina,thegiantostriches(rhias)ontheplainsweredifferentthanthesmallerspeciesfoundinPatagonia,andbothweredifferentthantheAfricanostrich.Thus,inthesetwoexamples,specieswereseentovaryasaresultofbothtimeandgeographicallocationchanges.Theprevailingviewwasthatasonespeciesdisappeared,anewspeciessuddenlycameintoexistencetoreplaceit.Darwinfoundthisunacceptable,andhisthinkingturnedtotransmutation(i.e.,theideathatspecieschangedfromonelocationtoanotherorfromoneera to thenextbygradual changesover longperiods thatmaybethousandsormillionsofyears).ThechallengingquestionDarwinponderedwasbywhatmechanismthiswasachieved.

Afterhis return from theBeagle voyage,hehadsent thespeci-mens he had collected to experts in Cambridge and London foranalysis.Heworkedontheinformationhegotbacktogetherwiththenoteshehadcompiledduringhisvoyageandconcentratedonfinding a mechanism for transmutation of species. At this time,hewas influencedbyreadingThomasMalthus’“AnEssayonthePrinciplesofPopulation”(1978).Inthisessay,Malthusproposedthatpopulationgrowthwouldbedecreasedby limits on foodsupply.Darwinrealizedthatinthestruggleforexistence,favorablevaria-tionswouldtendtobepreservedandunfavorableonesdestroyed.Theresultovertimewouldbetheformationofnewspecies.Thus,anindividualwithenhancedcharacteristicssuchasasharperbeakor a brighter colormight be better able to surviveand reproducethanothers.ThisessentiallywasthePrincipleofNaturalSelection.Itshiftedattentionfromdifferencesbetweenspeciestocompetitionwithin species.Darwinresistedpublicationofhis ideas formanyyears,duringwhichtimeheconsultedextensivelywithplantand


85


animalbreedersandthoughtdeeplyaboutthesubject.Finally,hewashurried intorevealinghis theorybyreceivingacommunica-tion from another naturalist, Alfred Russel Wallace, in which hedescribedatheorysimilartothatwhichDarwinhadbeenelaborat-ing.Wallace,however,didnothavethelargeamountofconfirmingexperimentalevidencethatDarwinhadaccumulated.Itwasagreedthat Darwin and Wallace present a joint paper to be read to theLinneanSocietyofLondonin1858.Darwinthenwentontopublishhistheoryin1859inapublicationentitled“OntheOriginofSpeciesby Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of FavouredRacesintheStruggleforLife”(1859).Thishasprovedtobeoneofthemostinfluentialscientificpaperseverwritten.Darwin’swork,insimpleterms,showedthatevolutionoccurredbychangesrequiringthousandsormillionsofyears.Themechanismfortheseevolution-arychangeswascallednaturalselection,aprocessinwhichspeciessurvived throughthe inheritanceof favorable traits.Furthermore,themillionsof speciespresent todayhaveevolved fromcommonancestorsbyabranchingprocesscalledspeciation.

Albert Einstein (1879–1955)

AlbertEinsteingainedadiplomainphysicsandmathematicsfromtheSwissFederalPolytechnicSchoolinZurich.Hisimmediatecareerwasalittleunusual.Unabletofindateachingpost,hetookaposi-tionastechnicalassistantintheSwissPatentOfficein1901.Itwasduringhistimehereandinhissparetimethatheproducedsomeofhismostremarkablework.Theworkatthepatentofficedidnotrequiregreatmentaleffort,anditisthoughtthatthisfreedhimtoapplyhisintellecttoimportantproblemsthatattractedhisinterest.In1905,hepublishedthreepapers,eachoneamilestoneinscience:

1.Thetheoryofspecialrelativitythatintroducedrevolution-aryconceptsabout thephysicsof theuniverse.Upto thattime,Euclideangeometrywasusedtodescribespace,usingthreespatialcoordinates.Einsteinshowedthatwhenlargedistances and high velocities (of the order of the velocityof light)wereconsidered, itwasnecessary tobring in theextracoordinateoftime,sothatproblemsneededtoinvokeafour-dimensionalspace–timecontinuum.Fromthetheoryof relativity,oneprediction was that amovingclock runs


86


moreslowlyandisshortenedinlengthinthedirectionofmotion, a result that seemed counterintuitive to previousthinking. This prediction has been confirmed by variousexperiments. Another outcome was the simple equationE = mc2(Eisenergy,mismass,andcisthevelocityoflight),which showed that mass and energy are interconvertible,thebasicequationfordescribingnuclearreactions.

2.AtheoryofBrownianmotion.Thisisaphenomenoninwhichparticlessuspendedina liquidshowcontinuous irregularmovements. The movements are caused by molecular col-lisions with the particles. Einstein developed a theory inwhichmovementsoftheparticlescouldbepredictedfromasimpleequationinvolvingthediffusioncoefficientandtime.

3.Thephotoelectriceffectinwhichelectronsareemittedfromasurface,usuallyametal,inresponsetoincidentlight.Thisillustratedthedualnatureoflight(i.e.,itcouldbethoughtofaswavesorparticles).Electrons wereemitted provided theenergyofthelightwasaboveathresholdvalue(aquantum).Einstein’s conceptual work initiated discoveries that devel-opedthequantumtheoryandformedthebasisformodernelectronics. The explanation of the photoelectric effect andothercontributionsledtotheawardoftheNobelPrizein1921.

From1911to1933,EinsteinoccupiedprofessorshipsatZurich,Prague,andBerlin.In1933,hemovedtotheUnitedStateswherehetookthepositionofProfessorofTheoreticalPhysicsatPrincetonUniversity.

The important thing is not to stop questioning.*(AlbertEinstein)

I never teach my pupils. I only try to provide the conditions in which they can learn.†(AlbertEinstein)

Rosalind Franklin (1920–1958)

In1938,RosalindFranklinattendedNewnhamCollege,oneoftwowomen’s colleges at Cambridge University, where she majored inphysicalchemistryandgraduatedwithabachelorofarts in1941.

*The Quotations Page (www.quotationspage.com/quote/9316.html), accessedSeptember2010.

† The Quotations Page (www.quotationspage.com/quote/40486.html), accessedSeptember2010.


87


Following this, she started workwith theBritish Coal UtilizationResearch Association (BCURA), where she was able to pursueresearch forherPh.D.For thenext fouryears, sheworkedon theelucidationofthemicrostructuresofvariouscoalsandcarbons.Theaim was toexplain why some were permeable towater, gas, andsolventsandhowheatingandcarbonizationaffectedpermeability.Shedemonstratedthatporesincoalhaveconstrictionsatamolecularlevel,actingas“molecularsieves,”successivelyblockingthepene-trationofsubstancesaccordingtomolecularsize.Thisfundamentalworkenabledtheclassificationofcoalsandtheaccuratepredictionof their performance to high accuracy. The research yielded fivepublications,andshewasawardedherPh.D.in1945.

AttheendofWorldWarII,shetookapositionattheLaboratoireCentraldesServicesChimiquedeL’EtatinParis.HereshelearnedthetechniqueofX-raydiffractionandusedittoanalyzethestruc-turesofgraphitizingandnongraphitizingcarbons.Thisworkhelpedin the development of carbon fibers and heat-resistant materialsandearnedheraninternationalreputationamongcoalresearchers.Although happy in France, she decided to return to England in1949andwasawardeda three-year fellowship toworkunder thedirectionofJohnRandallatKing’sCollege,London,whereshewasassignedtoworkonthestructureofDNA.TheapplicationofX-raycrystallography to elucidate the structure of complex biologicalmoleculeswas justbeginning,andFranklinwasapioneer inthisarea.Unfortunately,herstayatKing’sCollegewasnotahappyoneduetoamisunderstandingwithacolleague,MauriceWilkins,whoassumedthatshewastoworkashisassistantontheDNAresearch,whereasRandallhadgivenherautonomyinherproject.Theclimateforwomenattheuniversitywasnotidealatthetime.Forexample,only males were allowed to eat lunch in the common room, andafterhours,Franklin’scolleagueswenttomen-onlypubs.

FranklindiscoveredthatDNAcouldcrystallizeintwodifferentforms: theAandBforms.Thesetwoformsweremixedtogether,yieldingimpurecrystalsandmakingtheX-raydiffractionpatternsimpossible to interpret. Franklin developed an ingenious albeitlaboriousmethod to separate the two forms, enablingclear X-raypatternstobeobtained.OneofthepatternswasshownbyWilkinstoJamesWatsonandFrancisCrick,alsoworkingonthestructureof DNA, at the Cavendish laboratory in Cambridge, without theauthorization of Franklin. This helped Watson and Crick in their


88


formulationofthestructureofDNA,whichtheypublishedin1953,withoutproperlyacknowledgingtheirdebttoFranklin’swork.

Franklin arranged to transfer her fellowship to J.D. Bernal’scrystallographylaboratoryatBirkbeckCollege,London,wheresheturned her attention to the structure of plant viruses. Bernal, aneminentscientist,hadcalledherX-rayphotographsofDNA“Themost beautiful X-ray photographs of any substance ever taken.”*From1956,Franklinbecameseriouslyillanddiedin1958,tragicallycuttingshortabrilliantcareer.Inher16-yearcareer,shepublished19 articlesoncoalsandcarbon,5onDNA,and21onviruses.Duringher final years, she received increasing numbers of invitations tospeakatconferencesallovertheworld.Hadshelivedtocontinueherworkonviruses,thiswouldalmostcertainlyhaveearnedherfurtherawardsandprofessionalrecognition.

Galileo Galilei (1564–1642)

GalileoGalileiwasborninPisa,Italy,buthisfamilymovedtoFlorenceintheearly1570s.HematriculatedattheUniversityofPisa,wherehewas to studymedicinebut became more interested in mathematics.In 1585,helefttheuniversitywithouthavingobtainedadegree.Forseveralyears,hegavetuitioninmathematicalsubjects.Itwasduringthisperiod thathedesignedanewformofhydrostaticbalanceandbeganstudiesonmotion.Hisworkoncenterofgravitybroughthimrecognitionamongmathematicians,andin1589,hewasappointedtothechairofmathematicsattheUniversityofPisa.AfamousexperimentthathecarriedoutatthattimewastodropobjectsofdifferentweightsfromtheLeaningTower.ThisexperimentshowedthatthetimetakentofallwasnotproportionaltotheweightasAristotlehadclaimed.

Later,afterobtainingachairofmathematicsattheUniversityofPadua(1592–1610),Galileodeterminedthatthedistancefallenbyabodyisproportionaltothesquareoftheelapsedtime(thelawoffalling bodies). Also, he showed that the trajectory of a projectileisaparabola,againcontradictingAristotelianphysics. Itneeds toberecognized,however,thatdespitethesecontradictions,Aristotle(384bc–322bc)wasoneofthegiantswhohasinfluencedthinking.

*SanDiegoSupercomputerCenter(www.sdsc.edu/ScienceWomen/franklin.html),accessedOctober2010.


89


In 1609, there was to be a change that dramatically affectedGalileo’s career as well as subsequent science. An instrument(an earlyformof telescope)hadbeen inventedin theNetherlandsthat magnified images of distant objects. Galileo, by learning theart of lens grinding, was able to improve the instrument and touse it for study of the skies. Important discoveries followed withtheuseofthetelescope,whichmagnifiedobjectsbyafactorof20.Hewasabletodrawthemoon’sphasesandshowedthatitssurfacewas not smooth. The four main moons of Jupiter were observed,nowreferredtoastheGalileanmoons.HeobservedthattheplanetVenusgoesthroughphases,thesameasthemoon.Alltheseobser-vationssupportedtheviewofNicolausCopernicus(1473–1543)thatthe earth was not the center of the universe and that the planetsrevolved around the sun. Galileo’s observations were recorded inabookentitledSiderius Nuncias(theStarryMessenger).Inthesub-sequentperiod,Galileohadtotreadafinelinewiththeteachingsofthechurch.HehadbeengivenpermissiontopresenthiswritingsontheconditionthathetreattheCopernicantheoryashypothetical.However,itwasdeterminedthathehadbreachedthisconditionandthatacasewouldbebroughtagainsthimbytheInquisition.Hewaspronouncedtobesuspectofheresy,madetoadmitthathehadover-statedhiscase,andmadetoobjureformally.Althoughhewascon-demnedtolifeimprisonment,hemovedtoavillainthehillsaboveFlorencewherehelivedfairlycomfortablyfortherestofhislife.

Dorothy Hodgkin (1910–1994)

DorothyHodgkin(néeCrowfoot),ofBritishnationality,wasborninCairo,Egypt,whileherparentswereworkingthere.HerfatherwasanarchaeologistwiththeBritishMinistryofEducation,andthisgaveDorothy opportunities for travel in her early years. She graduatedfromSomervilleCollege,Oxford,withadegreeinchemistry.In1933,she began work on her doctoral degree with the eminent scientistJ.D.BernalattheCavendishLaboratoryinCambridge.TheirfieldofstudywastherelativelynewoneofX-raycrystallography.PioneeringworkbyMaxvonLaue,WilliamHenryBragg,andWilliamLawrenceBragghadshownthatatomsinacrystaldeflectedX-raystogivepat-ternsthatenabledinformationtobededucedaboutthepositionsofatomsinthecrystal.Hodgkinmadethetechniqueofcrystallography


90


herownandusedittodeterminethestructureofcomplexbiologicalcompoundsincludingproteins.Herachievementsinelucidatingthestructuresofimportantmoleculesmakeanimpressiverecord:

1937:Cholesterol1945:Penicillin1954:VitaminB12

1969:Insulin

Inaddition, she contributed to structuredeterminationsof lacto-globulin, ferritin, and Tobacco Mosaic Virus (TMV). She wasawarded the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1964 for her research,especially on the structure of vitamin B12. Her work on insulindemonstrated her ingenuity and relentless perseverance over aperiodof34yearsfrom1935.Althoughtheinsulinmoleculeissmallbyproteinstandards,itisneverthelessapolymerof51aminoacidresidues,adauntingtaskforthosewhoattempttodeduceitsstruc-ture.Hodgkin’sapproach includedreplacementof thezincatomsof insulin with atoms of three heavier elements, lead, uranium,andmercury, to facilitate thestructuralanalysis.Therelationshipbetweenthemolecularstructureofinsulinanditsspecificfunctioninregulatingsugarmetabolismhasopenedthewayforunderstand-ingstructure–functionrelationsofcomplexbiologicalmolecules.

HodgkinworkedatOxfordUniversityaswellasinthecrystallog-raphygroupofBernalatCambridge.Shehostedmanystudentsfromoverseas countries and formed lasting friendships with scientistsabroad.Sheappearstohavebeenperfectlyateaseworkinginwhatwasverymuchamale-dominatedprofession.Thechangeinnameuponmarriagehasattimesbeenproblematicforacademicwomen.Shepub-lishedherpenicillinstudiesunderhermaidenname,Crowfoot,andlaterannouncedthestructureofvitaminB12asHodgkin,hermarriedname.Subsequently,somescientistsdidnotknowthattheywerethesame.Manywomenavoidthisproblembyretainingtheirmaidennamethroughouttheirprofessionallife.Inadditiontoherscientificactivi-ties,shechampionedmovementsforworldpeaceanddisarmament.

Rather than further detailing her achievements, it may be moreinstructivetoquotesomeofthecommentsmadeaboutherbycon-temporarieswhoknewherwell.Oneofhercolleagues,MaxPerutz,whosharedtheNobelPrizewithJohnKendrewforstudiesonthestructureofglobularproteins,saidofher,“Shewillberememberedasagreatchemist,asaintly,gentleandtolerantloverofpeopleanda


91


devotedprotagonistofpeace.”*Anothercolleague(Dodson,2002)hadthistosayabouther:“AlthoughDorothy’slaboratorywasacentreforX-rayanalysisandshewasuncompromisinglydedicatedtoresearch,herwarmthandkindnesstothepeopleinherlaboratorymadeitanespecially human place” (p. 181). One of her contemporaries com-mentedthat“Dorothyhadanunerringinstinctforsensingthemostsignificantstructuralproblemsin thefield,shehadtheaudacity toattacktheseproblemswhentheyseemedwell-nighinsoluble,shehadtheperseverancetostruggleonwardwhenotherswouldhavegivenupandshehadtheskillandimaginationtosolvetheseproblemsoncethepiecesofthepuzzlebegantotakeshape”(Glusker,1994,p.2465).

Irving Langmuir (1881–1957)

IrvingLangmuirgainedaBachelorofScienceinmetallurgicalengi-neeringfromtheColumbiaUniversitySchoolofMines,NewYork,in1903.Hehadbeengreatlyinfluencedbyhisolderbrother,Arthur,a research chemist, who had helped himsetup hisfirst chemicallaboratory in the corner of his bedroom. In 1906, he obtained hisPh.D.underNobelLaureateWaltherNernstinGottingen.HisPh.D.researchwasdoneonthe“Nernstglower,”anelectriclampinventedby Nernst. He then taught at Stevens Institute of Technology inHoboken,NewJersey,until1909,whenhebeganworkattheGeneralElectricResearchLaboratoryinSchenectady,NewYork.Oneofthefirstproblemsthatheworkedon,underthedirectionofWillisWhitney,wastheshortlifeoftherecentlydevelopedtungstenfilamentlamp,causedbyarapidandprogressiveblackeningofthebulb.Oneofthelinesofattackontheproblematthetimewastotrytoimprovethevacuumin thebulb.LangmuirconvincedWhitneythatheshouldtackletheproblembyinvestigatingtheeffectsonthetungstenfila-mentofthedifferentgasesthathiscolleaguesweretryingtoelimi-nate.Conventionalwisdomwasthattheblackeningwascausedbywatervapor,andthustheneedforlowpressure.Langmuirbubbledgasthroughliquidairintothelampandshowedthattheblacken-ingwasunaffected.Soonafter,hediscoveredthatthetungstenwasbeingevaporatedfromthehotfilament.Particlesfromthetungsten,

*San Diego Supercomputer Center, “Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin: A Founderof Protein Crystallography” (www.sdsc.edu/ScienceWomen/Hodgkin.html),accessedOctober2010.


92


because of the high vacuum, could travel across the empty spaceandcondenseonthebulb,causingtheblackening.ThesolutionthatLangmuircameupwithwastosurroundthefilamentbyablanketofrelativelyinertgas.Thatwouldreducetheevaporationrate,makingthefilamentlastlongerandenablingittoburnmorebrightly.Atfirst,nitrogengaswasused,butlateritwasfoundthatargonactedasthebestblanket.Thedesignofelectriclampssubsequentlysurvivedrel-ativelyunchangedforalongperiod.Langmuir’sapproachhadnotbeentotackletheproblemheadon.Hehadaninquiringmindthatallowedhimtoconsiderallaspectsofaphenomenon.Althoughhehadkeptthecentralproblematthebackofhismind,hewasmoti-vatedtostudythefundamentaltheoryofprocessesassociatedwithit.Thesestudiesgavetheunderstandingthatwasneededtoarriveatasolutiontotheproblem.Theyalsoledtoapplicationsinotherareas,suchasdevelopmentofthehighvacuumelectrontube,theisolationofatomichydrogen,andtheprocessofhydrogenarcwelding.

Subsequently,Langmuir’sresearchextendedintoareasofscienceofgreatdiversity,includingvalencetheory,catalysis,surfacefilms,andatmosphericphysics.In1932,hewasawardedtheNobelPrizeforhisworkonsurfacefilms.HewasthefirstAmericanindustrialchemisttoreceivethishonor.The Collected Works of Irving Langmuir(1962)isacollectionofhispublicationsin12volumes.TheLangmuirLaboratoryforAtmosphericResearchnearSocorro,NewMexico,wasnamedinhishonor.Insurfacechemistry,hisnamehasbeenrenownedbytheLangmuir Adsorption Isotherm and by a journal of the AmericanChemicalSociety,calledLangmuir,whichisdevotedtosurfacescience.The legacy of IrvingLangmuir is the brilliant science that resultedfromhisgeniusandthefreedomhewasgivenbytheGeneralElectricCompanyandhisfirstdirector,WillisWhitney,tostudythefunda-mentalbehaviorofphenomenainwhichhewasintenselyinterested.

History proves abundantly that pure science, undertaken without regard to applications to human needs, is usually ultimately of direct benefit to mankind.* (IrvingLangmuir)

The scientist is motivated primarily by curiosity and a desire for truth.†(IrvingLangmuir)

*Great-Quotes.com(www.great-quotes.com/quote/1440056),accessedSeptember2010.

† Great-Quotes.com (www.great-quotes.com/quote/1440059), accessedSeptember2010.


93


Lise Meitner (1878–1968)

LiseMeitnerwasanAustrianphysicistwhowasamemberoftheteamthatdiscoverednuclearfission.Inheryouth,womenwerenotallowedto attend institutions of higher education. However, with supportfromherfamily,shewasabletohaveprivatetuitionthatenabledhertoattenduniversity.SheenteredtheUniversityofViennain1901and,in 1905, completed her undergraduate studies and commenced herdoctoraldegree.Shewasinfluencedinherearlyscientificcareerbyafamousscientist,LudwigBoltzmann.Aftercompletionofherdoctoraldegree,encouragedbyherfatherandwithhisfinancialassistance,shemovedtoBerlin.Hereshewasgiventheunusualprivilegeofattend-ingthelecturesofMaxPlanck.OneyearafterherarrivalinBerlin,shebecamePlanck’sassistant. In the followingyears, shebeganalifelongcollaborationandfriendshipwithOttoHahn,anoutstand-ingchemist,andwithhimdiscoveredseveralnewisotopes.In1909,shepresentedtwopapersonbetaradiation(emissionofelectrons).

In 1912, theHahn–Meitner team moved to theKaiser WilhelmInstitute(KWI)inBerlin,whichhadrecentlybeenfounded.Initially,MeitnerworkedwithoutsalaryasaguestworkerinHahn’sdepart-ment of radiochemistry. In 1917, together with Hahn, she discov-eredthemostabundantandlongest-livedisotopeofprotactinium(Pa-231, half-lifeof 32,760 years).She was made head of the radiophysicssectionattheKWIwithHahnasheadofradiochemistry.In1922,shediscoveredthecauseoftheeffectnowknownastheAugereffect, after the French scientist, Pierre Auger, who observed thephenomenonin1923.Whenanelectronisremovedfromthecorelevelofanatomtoleaveavacancy,anelectronfromahigherenergylevelmayfallintothevacancyresultinginareleaseofenergy.Theenergycanbetransferredtoanotherelectron(theAugerelectron)thatisejectedfromtheatom.

Atthattime,severalgroupswereworkingonnucleartransitions,including Ernest Rutherford in Britain, Irene Joliot-Curie in France,andEnricoFermiinItaly, inadditionto theMeitner–HahnteaminGermany.In1933,AdolphHitlercametopower,andsoonafter,perse-cutionofJewsinGermanybegan.MeitnerwasfromaJewishfamily,althoughsheandsomeofhersiblingsconvertedtoChristianitylaterinlife.AlthoughmanyJewishscientistsleftGermany,Meitnerremainedforsometime.However,aftertheannexationofAustria,sheescapedin


94


1938throughtheNetherlandstoSweden.ShetookupapostatManneSiegbohm’slaboratoryinStockholm.ShecontinuedtocorrespondwithHahn,andthetwohadaclandestinemeetinginDenmark.Hahnhadfoundthatneutronbombardmentofuraniumproducedtheelementbariumbut, puzzledbythisresult,consultedwithMeitner.Meitner,workingwithhernephew,OttoFrisch,wasthefirsttoarticulateathe-oryofhowthenucleusofanatomcouldbesplit intosmallerparts.Uraniumnucleihadsplit intobariumandkryptonwithaccompani-mentoftheejectionofseveralneutronsandalargeamountofenergy,theprocessbeingcallednuclearfission.SherealizedthatthesourceofthehugereleaseofenergycouldbeexplainedbyEinstein’sfamousequation,E=mc2,relatingmassandenergyinterconversion,andthatachainreactionofexplosivemagnitudecouldberealized.Asaconse-quence,severalscientistsconvincedAlbertEinsteintowritealettertoU.S.PresidentFranklinRooseveltexplainingthepotentialforadevas-tatingweaponandwarningofthedangeroftheknowledgefallingintothewronghands.Thus, theManhattanProjectatLosAlamos,NewMexico,wasinitiatedwiththepurposeofproducinganatomicbomb.Meitnerrefusedtobeinvolvedintheproject.

Meanwhile, Hahn and Fritz Strassman published the result thatbarium had beenproducedbybombarding uraniumwithneutronsinNaturwissenschaften in1939. Itwaspolitically impossible for theexiledMeitner topublish jointlywithHahn. In1944,HahnreceivedtheNobelPrizeforchemistryforthediscoveryofnuclearfission.Manybelieved thatMeitnershouldhavesharedtheprize,but thecircum-stancespreventedthis.In1966,MeitnersharedtheEnricoFermiAwardwithHahnandStrassman,goingsomeofthewaytocompensatingforbeingoverlookedbytheNobelCommittee.Shewasalsorecognizedbyreceivingtheawardin1946ofthe“WomanoftheYear”fromtheNationalPressClub(UnitedStates).ShewasawardedtheMaxPlanckMedaloftheGermanPhysicsSocietyin1949aswellashonorarydoc-toratesatPrincetonUniversity(NewJersey)andHarvardUniversity(Cambridge,Massachusetts).Furtherrecognitionwasgiventoherin1997whenelement109wasnamedmeitneriuminherhonor.

Gregor Mendel (1822–1884)

GregorMendel(bornJohannMendel)wasbornintoapoorfarmingfamilyinHynice,Moravia(nowCzechRepublic).Toescapealifeof


95


poverty,heenteredthemonasteryoftheAugustinianOrderofSt.ThomaswherehetookthenameGregor.HeattendedtheUniversityof Vienna to study teaching but failed his exams for a teachingdiploma.His interestinthenaturalsciences ledhimtostayonatthemonasteryandusehistimetocarryoutexperimentalworkaswellas teachmathematics. Hechose the commongardenpea forhis research and grew these in the monastery garden. Peas hadtheadvantageinthattheycouldeasilybegrowninlargenumbers,andtheirreproductioncouldbemanipulated.Mendelwasabletoselectively cross-pollinate purebred plants with particular traitsanddocument theoutcomesovermanygenerations.Farmershadfor thousands of years been breeding their plants in attempts toimprove their quality, but it had been a hit-or-miss approach inwhichthemechanismsgoverninginheritancewerenotunderstood.Mendel’sworkaddressedthequestion:“Whatreallyhappensinthetransmissionofhereditarytraitsfromparentstoprogeny?”

Mendelworked forseveralyears, carefully self-pollinatingandwrapping each individual plant to prevent accidental pollinationby insects. Between 1856 and 1863, he cultivated and tested atleast28,000peaplants,analyzingsevencharacteristicsor traitsofthepeaplants.Forexample,he foundthatcrossingtallandshortparent plants gave progeny that resembled the tall parent, ratherthanbeinga mediumheightblend.This typeofobservation thattraitsdonotshowupinoffspringplantswithintermediateformswas critically important,becauseat the time, theaccepted theorywas that inherited traits blended from one generation toanother.Mendel’sworkshowedthatthis“blendingtheory”waswrong.Insimplisticterms,hisworkshowedthat

1.Theinheritanceofeachtraitisdeterminedbyunitsorfactorsthatarepassedontodescendantsunchanged.(Theseunitsarenowcalledgenes.)

2.Anindividualinheritsonesuchunitforeachtrait. 3.A traitmaynot showup inan individualbut canstillbe

passedontothenextgeneration.Thisledtotheconceptthatadominantgenesuchasgivesthetallpeaplantwillhidetherecessivegenegivingtheshortplant.

MendelpresentedhisworktotheNaturalHistorySocietyofBrnoinatwo-partpaperinFebruaryandMarch1865,andthiswaspub-lishedin1866withthetitle“ExperimentsinPlantHybridization.”


96


The work was not understood and was largely ignored until theearly 1900s when several scientists recognized its importance.However, itwasnotuntil the1920sand1930s that its fullsignifi-cancewasappreciated.Sincethen,ithasallowedscientiststopre-dicttheexpressionoftraitsonthebasisofmathematicalprobability.It has become the foundation for the modern science of genetics.Experiments in Plant Hybridization isoneofthemostenduringandinfluentialpublicationsofscience.

Louis Pasteur (1822–1895)

LouisPasteurwasborn inDole,France, thesonofapoor tanner.He gained hisdoctorate in 1847at the École Normale SupérieureinParis,wherehestartedhis researchstudyingcrystalstructure,focusing on tartaric acid. He found that an aqueous solution oftartaricacidfromlivingthings,suchasgrapeproducts,rotatedtheplaneofpolarized light.A solutionof tartaric acid that hadbeenchemicallysynthesized,ontheotherhand,didnotshowthiseffect,eventhoughitselementalcompositionandchemicalreactionswereidentical.Pasteurresolvedthispuzzlebyseparatingthesynthetictartaricacidintotwocomponents(isomers),eachofwhichrotatedtheplaneofpolarizedlightbutinoppositedirections.Thisproperty,calledchirality,iscausedbymoleculesthatlackaplaneofsymme-try and have nonsuperimposable mirror images. Pasteur showedthat, in general, where biological molecules have optical isomers,onlyoneoftheformswillbebiologicallyactive.

After several years teaching and carrying out research at DijonandStrasbourg,hetookthepositionofprofessorofchemistryattheUniversityofLille.HerehecontinuedworkonfermentationthathehadstartedatStrasbourg.Atthattime,theconsensuswasthattheprocessthatcausedspoilageofbeveragessuchasbeer,wine,andmilkwascausedbyspontaneouscreation.Pasteurexposedboiledbrothstoairinflasksthatweredesignedtopreventparticlesfromentering.Nothinggrewunlessthevesselwasbroken,showingthatorganisms(germs) that grew in thebroths came from outside, supposedly assporesondust.Thisdebunkedthewidelyacceptedmythofsponta-neousgenerationandgavestrongsupporttothegermtheory.Pasteurinventedtheprocessinwhichbeverageswereheatedtokillbacteriaandmoldsthatwerepresent,aprocessaptlycalledpasteurization.


97


This work led to the idea that microorganisms infected animalsandhumanstocausediseases.Heurgedtheuseofantisepticstopre-venttheirentryinsurgeryandturnedhisattentiontodiseasepreven-tion.Thiswasinfluencedbythedeathsofthreeofhisfivechildrenfromtyphoidbeforereachingadulthood.Duringhisworkonchickencholera,heinstructedhisassistanttoinoculatesomechickenswhilehewasawayonholidays.Theassistantfailedtocarryouttheinstruc-tion.Onhisreturn,themonth-oldculturesmadethechickensunwell,butinsteadofbeingfatal,thechickensrecoveredcompletely.Hisassis-tantassumedthatanerrorhadbeenmadeandwasabouttodiscardtheculturewhenPasteurstoppedhim.Heguessedthattherecoveredchickensmighthavebecomeimmunetothedisease.Althoughithadbeenknown that theweak formofadisease suchas cowpoxgavecross-immunity to the much more virulent smallpox, this was dif-ferent.Inthiscase,theweakerformofthechickencholerahadbeengeneratedartificiallysothatanaturallyweakformofthediseasedidnotneedtobefound.Thisrevolutionizedworkoncombatingdiseasesandledtothedevelopmentofvaccines.Pasteurwentontoproducethefirstvaccineforrabiesaswellaschickencholeraandanthrax.

Pasteur’s work served as the foundation for many branches ofscienceandmedicine,includingstereochemistry,microbiology,bacte-riology,virology,andimmunology.Itisdoubtfulifanyotherscientisthasmadesuchahugelybeneficialcontributiontohumankind.

Imagination should give wings to our thoughts but we always need decisive experimental proof, and when the moment comes to draw con-clusions and to interpret the gathered observations, imagination must be checked and documented by the factual results of the experiment.*(LouisPasteur)

In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind.†(LouisPasteur)

Nikola Tesla (1856–1943)

Nikola Tesla was an inventor and engineer who was an ethnicSerb,borninwhatisnowCroatia,laterlivingintheUnitedStates

*AccessExcellence(www.accessexcellence.org/AB/BC/Louis_Pasteur.html),accessedOctober2010.

† QuoteDB(www.quotedb.com/quotes/2195),accessedSeptember2010.


98


and taking American citizenship. He developed revolutionaryadvancesinthefieldofelectromagnetisminthelate19thandearly20th centuries. His large number of patents and theoretical workwerethebasisofmodernalternatingcurrent(AC)electricalpowersystems, including thepolyphasesystemof electricaldistributionand the AC motor. He made other vital contributions that haveinfluenceddevelopmentofwirelesscommunication,LASER,radartechnology,X-rays,neonlighting,robotics,andremotecontrol.Theworldtodayowesmuchtothegeniusofthisman,butremarkably,relativelyfewpeopleknowhisnameeventhoughhisaccomplish-ments were probably greater than those of Edison and Marconi,whosenamesarewidelyknown.

Tesla studied at the Austrian Polytechnic in Graz and theCharles-FerdinandUniversityinPrague,buthisacademicachieve-mentswerenotspectacular.However,hereadmanyworks,appar-entlybeingabletomemorizecompletebooks.AswellasSerbian,hespokeCzech,English,French,German,Hungarian,Italian,andLatin. During his early life, he was stricken by several illnesses.He also suffered from a strangeaffliction in which he wouldseeblinding flashesof light, sometimesaccompanied byvisions. Thevisions were linked by words or ideas he had come across at aprevious time.This typeof experience,nowknownas synesthia,occurswhenstimulationofonesensoryorcognitivepathwayleadstoautomaticexperiencesinasecondsensoryorcognitivepathway.A simpleexampleiswhenaparticularwrittenwordmayproducethevisionofaspecificcolor.Itisanexperiencesharedwithothers,andmanyreportitasagiftthatcanaidintheircreativeprocesses.Inhisautobiography,Tesladescribesaneventwherehewasenjoy-ing a walk with a friend in the City Park. It was at a time whenhismindwasfocusedonwaystogenerateelectriccurrentwithouttheproblemsinherentindirectcurrent(DC),suchassparkingfrombrushes.Hewasrecitingapassage fromGoethe,whichhe foundtobeinspiring,whenanideacametohimlikeaflashoflightningandthetruthwasrevealed.HedrewadiagraminthesandoftherotarymagneticfieldthatwastobethebasisofACpowergenera-tion.ThissamediagramwaspresentedtotheAmericanInstituteofElectricEngineerssixyearslater.Teslahadthegiftofvisualizinghisinventionsinhismind.Hehadnoneedfordrawings.In1887,theTeslaElectricCompany builtmotorsexactlyashehadvisualized


99


them.Thepicturesinhismindwereexactlytoscaleandneedednoattemptstoimprovethedesign.

In1884,TeslaarrivedinNewYorkwithaletterofrecommendationtoThomasEdison.Afterworkingforatime,hepartedcompanywithEdison.Edisonlateradmittedthathisbiggestmistakehadbeentryingtodevelopdirectcurrent,ratherthanthesuperioralternatingcurrentsystemthatTeslahadputwithinhisgrasp.Teslaworkedforatimeasalaborer,diggingditchesandraisingcapitalforhisnextproject.In1887,heconstructedtheinitialbrushlessalternatingcurrentinduc-tion motor.He joinedwithGeorgeWestinghouse atWestinghouseElectric and Manufacturing Company’s Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,laboratories.Herehewasabletodevelophisideasforpolyphasesys-tems,whichallowtransmissionofACelectricityoverlongdistances.

During his career, Tesla had many setbacks. These includedserious illnessesandafire in1898thatdestroyedrecordsandputbackhisworkonwirelessradiotransmissionwhichotherwisemayhavegivenhimpriorityoverMarconi.Hediedpennilessinhisapart-mentinNewYorkandwithoutthefamethathesorichlydeserved.

Every effort under compulsion demands sacrifice of life energy. I never paid such a price. I have thrived on my thoughts.*(NikolaTesla)

References

Darwin,C.1859.“OntheOriginofSpeciesbyMeansofNaturalSelection,OrthePreservationofFavouredRacesintheStruggleforLife”(www.gutenberg.org/books/1228),accessedOctober2010.

Dodson, G. 2002. “Dorothy Mary Crowfoot Hodgkin O.M. 12 May 201910–29July1994.”Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society48:179–219.

Glusker,J.P.1994.“DorothyCrowfootHodgkin.”Protein Science3:2465–2469.Langmuir,I.1962.The Collected Works of Irving Langmuir,PergamonPress,

Elmsford,NewYork.Lyell,C.1830–1833.Principles of Geology, Volumes 1–3(www.esp.org/books/

lyell/Principles/facsimile/title3.html),accessedOctober2010.Malthus,1798.“AnEssayonthePrincipleofPopulation”(www.econlib.org/

library/Malthus/malplong.html),accessedOctober2010.Mendel,G.1866.Experiments in Plant Hybridization (www.mendelweb.org/

Mendel.html),accessedOctober2010.

*TeslaUniverse(www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-quote-42),accessedOctober2010.

101


Chapter 8FutureChallengesfor

ScientificResearch

Iwillnotceasefrommentalfight,norshallmyswordsleepinmyhand.*

WilliamBlake

Whatarethemainchallengesfacingscientificresearchintheimme-diate future? Until now, wehave been considering topics such asthetrainingthatascientistneedstoundergoforasuccessfulcareer,theattributesthatneedtobedeveloped,andthewaythescientificmethodshouldbeapplied.The focushasbeenon the individual.In this chapter, I would like to focus more generally on what isneededforscientificresearchtocontinuetoflourishandcontributepositively to human progress. Of course, the way science evolvesisdependenton thecumulativeeffortsof individuals,bothactivescientistsandthenonscientistswhoinfluencepolicies.

Two Areas for Change in Direction

TherearetwomainareaswhereIbelievethereisaneedtochangethedirectioninwhichscientificresearchisheading.First,itisdesir-able for the shackles that have been imposed on the creativity ofscientists in recent times to be loosened. Second, there is a needto nurture a more pleasant environment for scientists to work inthan the current one that is experienced in many scientific insti-tutions.The twoproblemsmentioned arenotmutuallyexclusive.Infact,theyare interrelatedandstemfromthesamesource.Thissourceisthecontrolsthathavebeenplacedonscientistsinthepastfewdecadesresulting fromthemanagerial ideologydiscussed inChapter5.

*GoodReads.com(www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/45356),accessedOctober2010.


102


Somereadersmaythinkthatthisisjusttheopinionofsomeonewhoispushingforabetterdealforscientists.Afterall,whyshouldscientists not be controlled? If they are not, they may well spendtheirtimeinivorytowersfollowingtheirwhimsandnotproducinganything of value to humankind. This can happen. Other readersmayquestionwhyabookthatissupposedlyaimedmainlyatgiv-ingadvice tobuddingscientists shouldbeconcernedwithsciencepolicy, which is more the domain of politicians and bureaucrats.I willattempttoanswerthesequestionsinthischapter.Briefly,thecurtailing of freedom for scientists to develop their creativity notonly stiflesscientificprogressbut,asaconsequence,erodesfutureeconomicgrowth.Everyworkingscientistandallthosecontemplat-ingacareerinscienceshouldbeawareofthisthreat.Asmentioned,thedirectionofscientificresearchinthefuturewillbedeterminedbythecumulativeinputofallthosewhohavearoletoplay.Itwillnotbesufficientforresearchersbeginningtheircareerstofocusonlyon perfecting their scientific skills. They will also need to take aprincipledpositioninregardtohowtheidealsofscienceshouldbeupheld.Thefuturedirectionofsciencewilldependonwhethertheystanduptothechallengeorwhethertheirresponseispusillanimous.

Why Are Humans the Only Species to Have Progressed Culturally?

InhisbookPioneering Research,DonaldBraben(2004)presentswhatI believe should be compulsory reading for all those embarkingonaresearchcareer.HereIcanonlysummarizebrieflythemainideasofthebook.Brabentracestheevolutionofhumankindfromitsprimitivebeginningstothepresent.Humanoidswerephysicallyinferiortosomeotheranimalsinmanyrespects,yettheyhaveman-agednotonlytosurvivebuttobecomethedominantspeciesoftheplanet.Whileotherspecieshaveremainedthesameformillionsofyears,humanshaveundergoneaspectaculartransformation.Whatistheexplanation?Brabensuggeststhatthetraitresponsiblefortheuniqueprogressofhumankindisan indomitablespiritofdissentpossessedbysomeofitsmembers(thatis,aninnatetendencynottoaccepthowthingsare).Thishasbeen thedriving force for thechangesthathavepropelledcivilization.Thesechangeshavecome

Future Challenges for Scientific Research

103


primarilythroughscienceandtechnology.Ofcourse,thisisnottoplay down the role that other human endeavors, such as art andliterature, have contributed to civilization. However, without thetechnologicaladvancesthathavebeenmade,asBrabenpointsout,humanswouldstillbetryingtosurviveinatooth-and-nailstruggle.Themostsignificantadvancesinsciencehavecomefromthosewhohavehadthefreedomtopursue their inquiries.Greatdiscoverieshaveusuallycomeoutoftheblue.Here,itisnecessarynottoconfusewhatismeantbyout of the blue.Itdoesnotrefertosomeonewander-ingaimlesslyandsuddenlystumblingonanimportantfinding.Theimportantfindingsarediscoveredbyresearcherswhohaveacquiredadvancedknowledgeofadisciplineandarethoroughlyconversantwithwhathasbeenfoundbypreviousworkers.Then,armedwiththisknowledge,theyrelentlesslypursueideaswherevertheyleaduntilinsightsintopreviouslyunimaginedterritoryarerevealed.

Why Present Funding Procedures for Research Are Unsatisfactory

Braben submits that present conditions for scientists largely elimi-natethistypeofresearch.Inthepastseveraldecades,asaresultoftheincreasingemphasisplacedonefficiencyandaccountability,thecreativityofresearchershasbeengreatlycurtailed.Thisisexempli-fiedinthewayscientificresearchiscurrentlyfunded.Therearenowmanymorescientistscompetingforafiniteamountoffunds.Fundingbodiesrequirescientiststosubmitapplicationsforfundingthatmustconformtostrictguidelines.Thesearethenevaluatedbypeerreview.ThefallacyinthisprocesshasbeenpointedoutinChapter5,refer-ringtocommentsofAlbertSzent-Gyorgi(1974).It tendstopromotepedestrianresearchanddoesnotallowfortheunexpecteddiscover-iesthatleadtothemostimportantscientificbreakthroughs.Researchproposalssubmittedtofundingbodiesareusuallyrequiredtosetouttheiraimsand to includedescriptionsofexpectedoutcomes,mile-stones,andtimelinesforcompletionofthedifferentstages.

Theadoptionofpeer-reviewprocessesforselectionofproposalsto fund has been in operation for a relatively short time, severaldecades. It has resulted in a burgeoning bureaucracy. Scientistsneedtospendalargeamountoftimeinpreparingtheirproposals,


104


and because only a small proportion is funded, this results in ahuge waste of time for the majority who are unsuccessful. To beapproved, the proposals must convince peer reviewers that thework is feasibleand that theobjectives canbeachieved. Inmanycases, much of the experimental work needs to be completed todemonstratetoreviewersthatitcanbeviable.Thus,weoftenhavethe absurd situation where scientistshave to practically completetheworktoconvincepeerreviewersthatitisviable,sothatfundingwillbeprovidedtodoworkthathasalreadybeendone.

Theshackles thathavebeen imposedoncreativeresearchasaresultofpeerreviewingofproposalsmustsurelyinduceamind-setfor scientists to plan unambitious objectives that can be accom-plishedwithouttoomuchrisk.Thismeansthatnoroomisleftforfollowing up the free thinking that, inprevious times,has led tothemostimportantadvancesinknowledge.ThenegativeeffectsonscientificprogresshavebeenwelldescribedbyBraben(2004),whohassuggestedanalternativetothepeerreviewsystemandhasputthisintopracticewiththeVentureResearchProgram(Braben,2004,2008).InitiallyfundedbyB.P.,researchprojectsarechosenforfund-ingsupportonthebasisthattheyareoutsidethemainstreamoftheproposalssubmittedforpeerreviewing.

In my own field of research, there has been a decrease in thenumberofscientistswhouseafundamentalapproach.Thesearetheoneswhohavecontributedbasicnewknowledge.Astheyretire,theyarenotbeingreplacedbyscientistswithasimilarfundamentalapproach.Asaresultoftheincreasingneedforuniversitydepart-ments and scientific organizations to acquire their own researchfunding, the selection criteria for new appointees are giving aheavy weighting to success in obtaining funding. This attributeisalsoreflectedincareeradvancement.Ascientistwhoobtainsanumberofsubstantialgrantsmayexpecttobepromotedrapidlytohigher levels.Theresearchmaybe fairlypedestrian,encompass-ing,aswehaveseen,projectswithsimpleobjectives thatmaybesafelyachieved.The result isan increase in short-termmundaneresearchanddisappearanceoftheresearchneededtoprovidethefoundation for significant advances. Inevitably, this is a path tomediocrity.Howthistrendcanbereversedisachallengeforfutureleadersin science.

In Chapter 7, we looked briefly at the careers of some notablescientists whose contributions to science have been outstanding.


105


Mostofthesemenandwomen,whoseeffortshaverevolutionizedhumanprogress,wouldnothavebeenabletomaketheircontribu-tionsiftheyhadtoparticipateintoday’scompetitionforthefund-ingrequiredtodotheirresearch.Beforehesetoutonhisunplannedquest, Albert Einstein did notknow what he would discover, yethisachievementswereawesome.Similarly,CharlesDarwinbeganhisobservationswithoutanypreconceivednotionsofwhere theywouldleadhim.Boththesescientists,whosethinkingprofoundlyaffectedthehumanworld,hadthefreedomtopursuetheirinnatecuriosity. IrvingLangmuir, an industrial scientist, was given freerein for his genius to flourish. No scientist working in industrytodaycouldhopeforthisfreedomandthereforecouldnothopetomatchtheaccomplishmentsofLangmuir.DorothyHodgkinbeganworking on the structure of insulin in 1935 and completed thisdauntingtaskin1969.Ifshehadsubmittedaproposaltoelucidatethestructureof insulinoverthatperiod,wouldshehavesatisfiedthepeer-reviewingprocess?Atthestartofthework,theobstaclestobeovercomecouldnotbeconceived,soitwouldhavebeenabsurdto try to propose expected outcomes and time lines for achiev-ingobjectives.All thescientistsmentioned inChapter7couldbethought of as dissenters according to the views of Braben (2004).They did notaccept the status quo ofknowledge at that timeandreachedouttoextendtheboundariesofourunderstanding.Theycouldonlydothisbecauseoftheintellectualfreedomtheyenjoyedthatenabledthemtoexploretheunknown.

Stifling of Creativity in Science Can Stunt Future Economic Growth

Earlierinthechapter,Ialludedtotheeffectthatstiflingofcreativityinsciencecouldhaveinstuntingeconomicgrowth.Howcouldthisbe?Brabenexplainsverywellhowthismayhappen.Theworld’spopulationisincreasing,andthereisnotalotthatcanbedonetohaltorevenslowtherateofincrease.Thisputsincreasingpressureon resources, particularly food supplies, needed to at least main-tainthestandardof living. Inthepast, thishasbeenachievedbycorrespondingincreasesineconomicadvances.Economicgrowthisacomplexparameteraffectedbymanyvariables,mostofwhichare


106


difficulttoquantifyortopredict.Mostmeasuresthathavebeenused,suchasrealglobalgrossdomesticproduct(GDP),showastochasticbehaviorovertime.Economistshaveattemptedtoexplainthecom-plexquestionofhoweconomicgrowthhappens.Some50 yearsago,RobertSolow(1957)showedhownewtechnologiescreatedalargeportion(estimatedtobeaboutfourfifths)ofeconomicgrowth.Forthiswork,hewasawarded theNobelPrize ineconomics in1987.Notallgrowtheconomistsagreeaboutthefractionofgrowththatcanbeexplainedbytechnologicalprogress,butalldoagreethatitscontributionisimportant.Weneedtorememberthatmosttechnol-ogystemsfrominnovativebasicscience.

Braben(2004)hasconcludedfromanalysisofdatathatworldGDPper capita was constant or increasing from the 1950s to the early1970s.ThisperiodisoftenreferredtoastheGoldenAge,becauseglobal economic growth was so high. This period also coincidedwithscientificandtechnologicaladvances—semiconductors,lasers,nuclearpowergeneration, computers,andplastics, toname justafew.Otherspectacularevents suchas sendingsatellites intoorbitand traveling to themoonhappened in thatera. Brabensuggeststhatsince theendof theGoldenAgeintheearly1970s, therehasbeenadeclineineconomicgrowthasquantifiedbytheworldrealGDP per capita. This period of decline correlates with the timesince scientific research has been subjected to increasing control.Researchersno longerhavethe freedomto followtheir ideasandexploretheunknown,but insteadhavehadtoconformtostrictlyregulatedprograms.Theprotocolsusedforselectionandsupportofresearchprojectsinhibitadventurousstudiesthatinvolvemajordeparturesfromthebeatentrack.

Suppression of Freedom Causes Stagnation of Knowledge

We can also learn from history. Some isolated societies that wewould regard as primitive do not show substantial changes overlongperiodsoftime.Theircustomsandfolklorearehandeddownfromonegenerationtothenextandareacceptedwithoutquestion.Forsocietiesthatwewouldconsidermoreadvanced,periodswheretherehasbeeneconomicandculturalstagnationhavecorresponded


107


to timesofsuppressionof freedomandknowledge.Theseperiodshavebeenimposedbyauthoritarianrule,beitofpoliticalorreligiousorigin.TheDarkAgesofEuropeinthetimefromthedeclineoftheRomanEmpire (aroundAD450) toaboutAD1000or longerwerecharacterizedbysubmissiontodogmaandeliminationof inquiry.Thischangedinthe17thand18thcenturies(AgeofEnlightenment)when people rebelled intellectually and began to question every-thing.Fromthe8thtothe14thcenturies,Muslimscientistsandschol-ars made great contributions to human knowledge. The splendidMuslimartandarchitectureofthisperiodcanstillbeappreciatedin Andalucia in Spain. Why has Muslim science and culture notprogressedfromthosetimesasithasinWesterncountries?

The Need for a Change in the Working Environment for Research

TheotherareawhereIfeelthereisaneedforchangeistheworkingenvironmentthatmanyscientistsfindthemselvessubjectedto.Thismainlystemsfromthecommand-and-controlclimatethathasbeenfoistedonthem.Scientistsareincreasinglypreventedfromexercis-ingthefreedomthatallowsthemtobecreative.Theyaretreatedas“knowledge workers” whose contributions are measured by howwelltheycomplywithobjectivesthattheyareexpectedtocompleteinacertaintime.Theirproductivityisassessedbysimilarmeasuresthat are applied to those who work on a factory production line.Goals thatareachievedinashort timeare thosethatare favoredasmakingaquickcontributiontothebottomline.ForascientisttoworkundertheseconditionscanbeasourceofgreatfrustrationandresultsinloweringofmoraleandoftentohealthproblemsaswasdescribedinChapter5.

The hierarchical command-and-control culture has encroachedonscientificresearchinstitutionshand-in-handwiththemanagerialorganization of research. Unfortunately, those who aspire to posi-tionsofcontrolareoftenmotivatedbygreedandthedesireforpower.Thesetypesofpeoplehavelittleempathyforsubordinates.Ratherthansupportingandencouragingthem,theymaytrampleontheirbest interests if theyfeel that theyposea threat to theirauthority.Howcanthistrendtowardanunpleasantworkplaceenvironmentbe


108


turnedaround?Thereisnoeasyanswer,butthisdoesnotmeanthatoneshouldnottry.InhisbookCorporate Renaissance,RolfOsterberg(1993)writesabout the“OldThought”andthe“NewThought” inbusiness. The “Old Thought” is what we have been experiencing,and the“NewThought” isashift in thinking towardvaluing theindividualandcreatinganenvironmentthatiswholesomeandcom-passionate.Thisiswhathehastosayaboutthehierarchicalsystem:“Thehierarchicalsystemisapowerstructure.Itisbuiltuponfear,suspicion and lack of trust. It reinforces the distance among indi-vidualsandthoroughlyprohibitscreativecooperationbycreatingaclimateofcompetition.Itisanimpedimenttodevelopmentandleadstowastedenergy.Itbuildsinertiaandinflexibilityintoourorganiza-tionsandisdevastatingtoourcreativity.Wewillneverrealizeourfullpotential ashumanbeingsunlesshierarchiesareabandoned”(Osterberg,1993,p.48).Ifthishasbeensaidaboutthebusinessworld,howmuchmorepertinentisittobesaidofthescientificworld?

For those entering a scientific research career, how will theyrespondtothechallengeIhaveposed?Willsomedismissitasbeingoverstatedorirrelevant?Perhapssomewillbeexcitedbythepros-pectofusingthesystemtoattainthepowertosubjugateothers.Willsomereactwithindifferenceand,iftheyadmitthereisaproblem,leavetheproblemforotherstodealwith?Orwilltherebesomewhorecognizetheproblemsandarereadytoacceptthechallengeandbecourageousenoughtotrytochangethingsforthebetter?Thelatteroptionistheonethatmaywellbethemostdifficult,butitmayalsobethemostnoble.

Improvementinthewayscientificresearchisorganizedandintheworkingenvironmentforscientistswillonlyoccurifthemanagerialsystemismademoreflexible.Aslongasthosewhoholdpositionsofauthorityinscientificorganizationsbelievethatthewaytheyoper-ateiscorrect,conditionswillnotchangeandwillprobablyworsen.Foramanagerialideologytohavetakencontrolofscientificestab-lishments, certain conclusions can be drawn. Scientistswho haveallowedittohappenmustnothaveagoodunderstandingofhowthescientificprocessworks,ortheyhavebeentoopusillanimoustoresistthechanges.Ifthisisthecase,howeasywillitbe,nowthatmanagerialismiswellentrenched,toeffectanychange?

Nevertheless, those who recognize how science is being mis-directedaredutyboundtotrytoturnthingsaround.Scientistsneedtoengagemorewith thosewhoholdpositionsofauthority, those


109


whocontrol thefinances,andthepoliticiansandmembersof thepublicwhoinfluencepolicy.Themannerinwhichscientificresearchshouldbeconductedisrarelydebatedpublically.Manyoutsidethescientificcommunitymaynotbeawareofthedangersposedtodis-coveryofnewknowledgebycurrentlyimposedcontrols.Tothosewhohaveneverthoughtverymuchaboutresearch,itmakessensetomanageitsoastohaveclearobjectivesandtodocumentprogressintermsofmeetingtheobjectiveswithincertaintimeframesandpredicting the financial benefits that will accrue. They have littleunderstanding of how this approach leads to nothing more thanachievingwhat wasplanned initially. Incontrast, the spectacularbreakthroughsthathavehadthegreatest impactonhumanprog-resshaveresultedfromimaginativethinkingthathasnotbeencon-strainedbypreconceivedobjectives.Eliminationofthelattertypeofresearch,whichiswhatiscurrentlyhappening,is,tousethewordsofDonaldBraben,killingthegeesethatlaythegoldeneggs.Thosepeoplewhounderstandthishavetheobligationtoexplainitandtoarguethecaseforchangesinpolicy.

Changes of policy that lead to less regimentation of researchscientists and greater opportunity for them to realize their truepotentialareboundtobenefitthegeneralcommunity.Butthiswillnotbeachievedeasily.Thosescientistswhosupportsuchchangeshaveworktodotobringtheissuesintothepublicdomainandtohavethemdebated.Anysmallmovementbacktowardmorefreedomforscientistswillinevitablybeaccompaniedbyahealthierworkplaceenvironment.Theworkplaceofresearchinstitutionswouldthenbedominatedlessbyautocraticmanagersandmorebyservantleaderswithgenuineconcernforthewelfareoftheircolleagues.

References

Braben,D.W.2004.Pioneering Research. A Risk Worth Taking,JohnWiley&Sons,Hoboken,NewJersey.

Braben,D.W.2008.Scientific Freedom: The Elixir of Civilization,JohnWiley&Sons,Hoboken,NewJersey.

Osterberg,R.1993.Corporate Renaissance,Nataraj,MillValley,California.Solow, R.M. 1957. “Technical Change and the Aggregate Production

Function.”The Review of Economics and Statistics39(3):312–320.Szent-Gyorgi,A.1974.“ResearchGrants.”Perspectives in Biology and Medicine

18:41–43.

K13197_cover.fhmx 5/25/11 10:22 AM Page 1

Composite

C M Y CM MY CY CMY K

K13197

w w w. c r c p r e s s . c o m

an informa business

6000 Broken Sound Parkway, NWSuite 300, Boca Raton, FL 33487711 Third AvenueNew York, NY 100172 Park Square, Milton ParkAbingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN, UK w w w . c r c p r e s s . c o m

Scientif ic Researchas aCareer

Scientific Research as a CareerM

acRitchie

“This will be a very important resource for beginning scientists so they can see what thefield is like, especially this all important topic of how to build prestige and a track recordfor excellence.”

—John D 'Angelo, Alfred University, New York

Describing the philosophy of the scientific method and the training and professional characteristicsneeded for a successful career, Scientific Research as a Career is a comprehensive “how-to”guide for the aspiring scientist. Based on the author’s experience both as a scientist in a researchorganization and as a university mentor, the book covers:

• The interaction between management and leadership principles and scientific research

• Qualifications and attributes usually required to become a successful researcher

• History, application, and prerequisites of the scientific method and scientific progress

• Exploration of the careers of pivotal and influential scientists

The author highlights the importance of networking and the value of forming contacts withcolleagues, joining scientific associations, attending conferences, making presentations, andacting as chairs for conference sessions. He also touches on the many areas outside of “thescience” that readers are likely to encounter during their career, such as mentoring, supervisingresearch students, and managing a group. The book clearly delineates not only the challengescurrently facing scientists, but also how to overcome them and achieve success in their careers.

GENERAL REFERENCE

scientific research as a career by finlay macritchie

Documents

c r c p r e s s

scientific method

scientific associations

uk w w w

book covers

copyright holders

copyright material

successful career