On the misuse of case studies: a case study

Our organization is committed to equality, diversity and inclusiveness. For example, Dr Clara Madeup benefitted from our ‘return to work’ programme that permitted her to come back to work after an extended 2 years maternity break. Clara is now a tenure track associate professor leading in the field of biotechnology.

How many Claras and Johns showcase success stories across our industry? More often than ever, we need to submit case studies during assessment processes, so much so that it is not unlikely to receive negative feedback if we describe our actions and outcomes carefully but without illustrating case studies.

Which is the likelihood that an organization does not have good case studies to showcase? And how likely is it that an organization decided to illustrate a failure in a case study? How representative success stories are of an organization, particularly organizations that are based on high staff turnover and competition? In fact, a few handpicked case studies can conceal otherwise worrisome statistics available within a document right alongside nice case studies.

Of course, the exclusive use of positive case studies in our websites, the brochures we use to describe how great we are, or at least we want to be, is absolutely obvious and legitimate.

I have seen case studies related to negative events within my organization only in two cases. First, introductory courses for health&safety that often provides plenty of examples of incidents with few cases discussed in detail. They are very informative because in the utter boredom of a long H&S course they actually tell you the story of not what can go wrong but what did go wrong in a lab like yours, maybe next door. Second, I had volunteered for a course designed to inform how to help victims of rape and sexual harassment. Instead of dwelling on how good our organization is, we went deep in describing which problems we have to deal with, how problematic communication can be, and how both academic and justice systems can easily fail victims. Very different situations but the illustration of what CAN and what DOES go wrong was absolutely instructive and helped focus on what we should do to prevent incidents.

During management meetings, we usually discuss what we can improve. Obviously, we do not speak about positive things only, quite the contrary. However, we do this often through rather unevocative statistics and get excited when we see progress compared to the past, or we are better than other organizations in the same area. I wished, however, organizations would focus more on the investigation of negative case studies during management meetings, of course, anonymized and taking any necessary precautions or even with the consent of colleagues involved, so that we could understand more deeply the consequences of our failures and identify better strategies to eliminate or mitigate our shortcomings.

I think we should bring a bit of the scientific method we experimentalists are so accustomed to deal with. We often learn a lot from experiments that fail for no apparent reason, and we showcase our failures to colleagues to get help and to teach less experienced how to identify solutions.

I am not really sure about how often ‘negative’ case studies are used in academic management to inform executive decisions in the broader community. In my experience not enough, probably, because the ‘negative’ case studies we should analyze are often just simply buried, swiped under the carpet, a topic for more specialist discussions reserved for those that make issues disappear.

I hope organizations will adopt more the use of ‘negative’ case studies as a tool to improve and fully understand the suffering of those who find themself in challenging situations. And I hope we are asked to produce case studies to illustrate success stories and good practices less frequently during an assessment, reserving these to public brochures.

Against (online) abuse

English football has announced a three days boycott of social media to raise awareness against online abuse. I am no footballer and I even do not follow football but I follow Formula One, and thanks to Lewis Hamilton engagement against racism I got aware of this initiative. Sport should be all about coming together in a joyful way and transforming the instinct to compete and fight into a game based on fairness and respect. However, far too often sport – and football in particular being so popular – makes itself a vector of abuse, online or in person, verbal or physical.

Abuse is part of our society and – like all of the human shortcomings – it will be never fully eradicated. However, abuse should still rise indignity from all us, either if online or not. Sadly, influential people have contributed to normalize online abuse, attitudes that are then percolating back into the streets. Admittingly, every person might have a different sensitivity and personal judgment about what ‘abuse’ is beyond the strict legal definition. This should not be, however, used as a free pass even just to be unkind, certainly not to be, well… you guessed… abusive.

Then, as someone active on social media, despite not being an athlete for the past quarter of a century, I’ll turn my social media off until Monday night in solidarity with this initiative and any victim of abuse.

Slaughterhouse.ac | cattle walks to the slaughterhouse happy

CH_cow_2_cropped — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle CC BY-SA 3.0

Although I am no expert in livestock production and food chains, I do recall debates on making abattoirs more humane by ensuring that animals are not aware of their fate. In other words, the poor bovine should not see other fellow animals being slaughtered fearing for their lives in a long and slow-progressing queue towards death. Fair enough.

***

While travelling to London for a networking event, I was messaging over Slack with a friend, a former PhD student, and casually chatting about a number of things. At his question: ‘how things are going’, I instinctively responded along the line of ‘well, although growing tired of the slaughterhouse that is academia…’. Although I love Academia, I have been also openly critical about it over the years. However, I never defined certain processes of Academia as a ‘slaughterhouse’ before. At the same time, the definition fits so well.

***

When I was a PhD student, I thought that for those students like me, doing anything else than staying in Academia was a failure. Bovine-me was roaming the green fields of Germany and The Netherlands happily fattening (quite literally in my case). A constant flow of fellow students would join us in ever greener pastures, cohort after cohort, and many others leaving for higher hills never coming back, with a few – barely visible at a distance – growing older at one of the most remote fields. Bovine-friends say, fields where the grass is the sweetest.

When the time came, and the gates opened, we rushed to the next wonderful field. Who did not rush, was simply pushed by the flow of the pack. Despite the dynamic crowdedness of lower fields, bovine-us kept decreasing in number happily walking towards the gates opening towards those greener and sweeter pastures we always fantasized about.

Most of us, fat and strong, perfect bovines, queued for the next gate, happily walking to an even better field, one-by-one, blissfully unaware, a pop, the last memory. Others are still grazing.

***

Academia depends on the constant flow of students through their classes, and many Universities, no doubt about those I know, do a wonderful job in training them. So many committed people that are dedicated to passing and expanding knowledge down the generations. Academic research depends on a rather large cohort of PhD students and post-doctoral scientists working hard, often paid modestly considering the years of unpaid (or worst debt-causing) training lured into the next job by promises of stability but kept in an unforgiving precariat state. Short-term contracts after short-term contract in a job where long-term vision should be key, we are subject to a constant process of review that in the best case is rigorous and tough, but that can be often also quite random and biased.

This process is largely physiological as the academic system is very competitive. Many collogues also express no concerns about it on the basis that selection has to occur, in a way or another. However, the impact on the mental health of academic workers is now evident, and not just only on students. I believe that a more efficient and fair system would be one that promotes leaving academia early as an active choice, where different career options are promoted, where there is clarity about the likelihood of promotions, and where there is no choice to be made between having a family and having a job.

Just to clarify the last point, once I was in a leadership course. A colleague asked “My husband has a tenured position at Cambridge University and we have a child. I am offered a tenured position elsewhere and I see no opportunity at Cambridge, what should I do?” The reply was: “I guess you have to make a choice between family and career”. As horrible as an answer it was, I should also clarify for those that are not aware of it that for who works in Academia this is not a choice, as if you do not progress on the ladder of academic positions, it is likely one day the gate of Slaughterhouse.ac will open for you – pop.

I hope one day, would I survive or strive in the system, I will have the tools to influence it and change it for the better. For now, I can just write about it, hoping that younger scientists will make more informed decisions than me and most of my colleagues. ■

Women in science (Cambridge Science Festival 2018)

This is one of the initiatives we have prepared for the Cambridge Science Festival 2018. Credit: Dr Suzan Ber.

We are committed to the best quality of scientific research and to facilitate the translation of scientific knowledge into improvements in healthcare. To improve people lives, we need the brightest minds and the most skilled individuals to team up and work together. This is why we see no distinction of nationality, gender, ethnicity or faith, we simply look for skills.

Our SCRATCH whack-an-oncogene game is aimed to engage young girls and boys in programming, because we need biomedical researchers to be quantitatively-minded, computationally skilled and working with tools from diverse disciplines. However, too often we lose talented young girls somewhere along the way to becoming a scientist, engineer or mathematician. We think that, sometimes, this is caused by a perceived lack of female role models.

Do you know the many bright female physicists, mathematicians, chemists, biologists and clinicians that made wonderful discoveries? If not, play our women in science puzzle [see here copy for printing, or copy for display on screen]! Does this mean we wish to motivate only young girls to be the great scientists of the future? Not at all. We want the Albert Einsteins and Maria Goeppert Mayers of the future to work together as equals, because then we can be more efficient and improve people’s lives more profoundly and positively.

Khushali and Pablo are testing one of the activities we designed for the Cambridge Science Festival 2018

Are sexual harassment and misconduct issues at Universities?

Over the last year, the widespread occurrence of sexual harassment and misconduct in the movie industry hit the news helping, with the amplification of social media, to raise the extent of the problem to public awareness, not just in Hollywood, but in everyday life of women. Have you wondered if sexual harassment is an issue at your workplace?

After more than 20 years of University life, either as a student or as an employee, I did not notice sexual harassment in my work environment—and this is part of the problem. We do not speak about sexual harassment because it is a very sensitive topic. Even those employers that take swift actions aimed to protect the victims will have to restrain their public disclosures to protect the victims. Therefore, I asked senior colleagues, and they confirmed that incidents do occur, even where the working culture is openly hostile to any type of harassment.

Breaking the silence

Before writing a few more words on this topic, I cut to the chase, and say that any type of harassment, but sexual harassment, in particular, are under-reported and, when they are reported, they are not advertised publicly. Thus, I here pledge my unconditional support for the initiative ‘Breaking the silence – preventing harassment and sexual misconduct’ and I invite anyone who did not feel comfortable in reporting instances of sexual harassment, harassment in general, hate crimes or sexual misconduct to at least report anonymously so that everyone can understand better the prevalence of the problem and if the mechanisms implemented by the University are sufficient to prevent or intervene in these cases.

But, let’s be clear that if you feel you have been a victim of sexual harassment (or any type of harassment or misconduct), try to find the way to get support. You are entitled to be helped to resolve any uncomfortable situation and, of course, to be protected from severe offences and misconduct.

[YouTube Breaking The Silence – University of Cambridge]

“Little girls don’t stay little forever. They grow into strong women that return to destroy your world.”

I was deeply touched by this sentence, and by the many public accounts and statements that I read or watched on regard of Larry Nassar. Nasaar was a doctor who looked after thousands of young female athletes, including the USA gymnastics national team, abusing at least hundreds of young girls. Nasaar was allowed into the hotel rooms of young girls and was able to escape justice for decades, based on the fact that his abuse was masqueraded as a legitimate medical intervention. Nasaar was able to do what he did for so long because he was able to sell himself as a great Doctor, one who forges great athletes. I did not see many people, after the trial, defending Nasaar.

So, people who criticise actresses or models that accused producers and photographers after many years should always remember that those people could do what they did, simply because they were great in their job. They became untouchable because of their capability to intimidate, some of them willingly, others perhaps unwillingly. Sometimes, they abused young girls as Nasaar did, young girls who became experienced actresses only later; other times, the abused more experienced women. Sometimes they forced themselves onto their victims, other times they accepted consensual exchanges of sexual favours having established, or at least allowed a toxic working culture. Not because they were adults having fun, but only because those were the expected business transactions, nothing to do with merit and talent.

Most of these abusers would have been considered dangerous serial rapists or child molesters would not have been for their professions.

Did these actresses and models do the right thing in reporting abuse so late? Yes. The movie, fashion and sport industries (just to list those mentioned so far) are guilty to have created toxic and abusive work environments, where the powerful were protected and employees were not. It is only nowadays that we have more tools to campaign against any type of abuse, and those abused women and men found the right moment and tools just now.

What Hollywood or Nasaar have to do with Academia?

Nasaar and Weinstein have nothing to do with Academia, directly. However, they are examples about how entire industries let their own people down. We should avoid that any industry, of course Academia included, falls or continue with similar gross failures.

Universities have to establish healthy working environments, including, of course, protection from sexual harassment and misconduct. Universities often have a duty of care for thousands of students and employees. The University of Cambridge, for instance, employs ten thousand people, educates twenty thousand students, and host other tens of thousands of contractors, suppliers and collaborators. How many interactions, conversations, jokes, relationships happen every day?

It is thus unavoidable that incidents happen, but it is essential that Universities make sure to have established an empowering and healthy work environment. No abuse, small or big, should be tolerated, on campus or off-campus.

I invite any of you that encountered this post to think, proactively, about what you can do to establish the right working culture, wherever you work, a culture where any uncomfortable situation is dealt with appropriately, abuse is never tolerated, victims are protected and abusers adequately penalised.

Pay attention; not even a scientific fact is objective.

Well, for the Church and many scientists back then, the Sun was rotating around the Earth, for Galileo and others, it was the other way around. We, scientists, are acquainted with disagreement, so it should not be surprising that any type of harassment has a subjective component. This may be one of the possible reasons why for the many people that voiced their indignation towards any type of sexual harassment, many other preferred to express their concern we are going too far. So, let me complete my post with the remark that sexual harassment is difficult to deal with, also because often there is a subjective component to it.

However gross a misrepresentation Nasaar was giving about his ‘medical practices’, this is how he was ‘selling’ his abuse and how some victims accepted the ‘treatment’. For us, now it is all clear that those were abuses. And this is a rather obvious distinction to be made.

Other times, things can be more difficult. An established, well-known scientist may flirt with a younger less established colleague hoping to find consensual sex, the younger colleague may be feeling intimidated and uncomfortable, yet not openly saying it. A colleague may try to be funny; another may feel offended. We should not be paranoid about our interactions at work because we do want to work in good and relaxed environments.

We should, however, acknowledge that harassment comprises a very broad spectrum of cases, most of which could be resolved speaking frankly between people (which is possible only in an open working culture). Other times, when there is no consent, when actions are repeated even after warnings or when the working culture is such that people who feel harassed or abused, do not feel safe to seek help, there is something very wrong to be fixed.

For those of you, I suppose the most, who feel will never harass or abuse anyone, colleagues included, you should still think you have a duty to create the right working culture where anyone can strive, at any time, including when harassment or worse might happen. You could merely speak with colleagues, or – if you did not do it already – volunteer for training and committees that will permit you to grow personally and make a difference.

Update [05.02.2018]

Professor Graham Virgo at the University of Cambridge has published a comment about the anonymous reporting tool, part of the Breaking the Silence campaign. Unsuprizingly, sexual harrasment and miconduct are underreported. Hopefully, this campagin is raising awareness about the type and prevalence of the problem. Above all, the Breaking the Silence campaign should be seen by the victims as a message of unconditional support to them and an open threat to abusers.

It is still early times and I do not have access to the fulls statistics, but it seems tha most prevalent problem is student-on-student sexual misconduct. I was suprized that those students who started to work in my team in October had to attend a sexual consent workshop. When, back then, I asked for the reason, I was informed about the issue of student-on-student misconduct.

I would like to praise CUSU for their activities, and advertise another of their initiatives, the Sexual Consent Campaign. The majority of students abhore sexual harassement, and many are activly campaigning against. However, the fact that too many young people arrive at University not knowing how to treat others respectfully is really concerning and evidence that sexual harassment and miconduct are more common than we may think in society.

We have the responsibility to ensure that University is a safe place for all and we must lead societal change.

Of course, it is not just students, and even a single case of staff-on-staff or staff-on-student misconduct is devastating. Hopefully, Academia is ready to send a clear message to their students and staff: no harassment tolerated, whoever you are.