Here is a post that took me a long time to write. A long time, because I didn't want to write such a post too soon after taking a leave of absence. Indeed, time could have eventually changed my perspective on the academic world. In the end, it didn't. I also wanted to wait until my last Ph.D. student defended his thesis, mainly to avoid him hearing any stressful comments about his thesis supervisor.
As a reminder, I've been on leave since September 1, 2014, after 2 years as a Full Professor at the University of Caen, 5 years as an Assistant Professor (MCF) at Paris-Sud University, 1 year of postdoc at École Polytechnique, 2 years as a teaching researcher at EPITA, 1 year as an ATER at Paris 7, and 3 years of doctoral studies at Paris-Sud.
Since my departure from academia in 2014, I've had many opportunities to meet former colleagues. I'm often asked questions, and I notice that, implicitly, the only accepted reason for leaving academia seems to be financial. Money, the great fantasy: if you leave, it's to earn more, right?
In fact, that wasn't the case for me. That's why I'm writing this post, to present a few good reasons for leaving academia, the reasons that led me to go.
I'm talking here about academia (mainly the university environment), but some of the points I'll mention can be directly applied to other public sectors—sometimes even worse, for example, when in addition to a strong administrative apparatus, you have to deal with the whims of an all-powerful elected official.
1. There is no longer a clear definition of the roles of a faculty member
This is the most obvious point and probably the one everyone agrees on. It's now almost impossible to clearly define what the real tasks of a faculty member are: teaching and research, that's clear. But does managing schedules and rooms fall under teaching? Is handling the contracts of adjunct lecturers a task for a PI (rather than an HR mission)? Does grant hunting fall under research? Is managing offices, supplies, coffee capsules, and library periodicals part of the job?
In short, you get the point: more and more tasks are being assigned to the only personnel that can't be "downsized," probably to save money, at the cost of a bleak future for the quality of French science.
2. Support functions now interfere with legitimate tasks
The support function encompasses all the people who, in theory, are there to serve the academic mission by offloading faculty members from tasks that aren't really their job but are necessary for it. This includes various secretariats, system administrators, technicians, HR, accounting, etc.
Let's be clear: nowadays, in most universities, it's the support function that effectively runs the show, with increasingly absurd constraints. Did you know, for example, that in some computer science labs, you can't be admin on your machine, and system administrators don't hesitate to question the technical choices of researchers? Or that some administrations require handwritten, non-B&W documents in multiple copies to process reimbursements?
3. The much-too-powerful administration has lost sight of human beings
This is a direct corollary of the previous problem: disgruntled and disillusioned support staff (rightfully so) apply rules without any consideration, even if it means penalizing everyone and stressing out students, etc.
4. The system is inherently dysfunctional
The latest trend in the public sector is objectification (= bean counting), such as counting the number of publications, the number of students in a degree program, the number of jury memberships, seminars, etc. This objectification comes from the fantasy of "doing it like the private sector."
The problem with this objectification, beyond its intrinsic foolishness, is that a performance measure without possible punishment or reward serves no purpose other than to create stress and humiliation.
5. The lack of recurring funding
Not much to add here; there's no more money for essential things like conference travel (it's not uncommon to pay out of your pocket in regional universities) or equipment (without research grants, it's difficult to have a decent desktop computer or laptop in some places).
6. The additional costs: constant waste
But alongside this lack of funding, there is constant waste. This waste is due to the exploitation by certain suppliers who take advantage of procurement rules to sell more expensive items that could be found cheaper elsewhere. But the biggest source of waste is in human aspects: a one-hour meeting with 10 people at average MCF level costs nearly 300 euros. How many hours do you spend in pointless meetings?
In addition to these reasons, with which a highly motivated person might be able to cope, there are far more serious issues.
7. The petty tyrants
The more the system deteriorates, the more certain individuals try to obtain positions of "power" (for whatever it's worth in academia, where there's actually no real power) to have control over resources or to be more comfortable. Once these people are in place, they will either be tyrannical, engage in shady dealings, or make others pay for imaginary offenses.
8. The lack of coherent vision
Today, it's very rare to meet visionaries among scientists. Indeed, bean counting tends to favor technical aspects, micromanagement, and incremental research, and so people with vision either stay silent or leave. At the level of lab management, leaders tend to be managers of a mosaic of topics, some important, others completely outdated, but no one has the courage to impose a coherent, long-term vision.
9. Intellectual poverty
To continue making myself unpopular, I ask a simple question: you, who are a faculty member reading this, how many books on pedagogy have you read? Books on society and its relationship to technology and science? On the sociological uses of your discipline? On ethics? Or even more simply, on other sciences?
There is a decreasing level of reflexivity and intellectual curiosity in universities, and it will eventually become apparent and have an impact.
10. Resignation
My last point, the one that literally made me run away: the acceptance of the impending death of the French academic environment. It is unacceptable to me to accompany a system to its death while believing it's the only way to save it.
In the end, why did I leave? For all these reasons, but especially for the last four. All the others are painful and depressing but bearable if people work together "for the greater good."
When we turn 90 and look back on our lives, what do we want to see? I've made my choice.