通过向上毒性在学术界获得成功的十大法则

伊琳娜·杜米特雷斯库(Irina Dumitrescu)称,大学对外宣扬精英教育,但实际上却竭尽全力保护有毒的人格

十一月 21, 2019
Source: Getty (edited)

点击阅读英文原文


你认为在学术界打造辉煌事业的方法是进行好的研究、娴熟的教学和慷慨的指导?这种费力的方法对一些人有效——但还有一种更简单的方法。

大学对外高唱精英统治之歌,但却随着不同的曲调起舞。但事实上,大学会尽一切努力来奖励和保护他们最具破坏性、最残暴和最缺乏合作精神的教职员。这些学者越是彻底地毒害部门、项目和个人生活,大学就越是加倍努力取悦他们。

大学甚至愿意毁掉自己的名誉,疏远校友,以保护欺凌者和施虐者。大学可能认为声誉管理要求掩盖这种行为,但大学应该知道,纸是包不住火的,丑闻最终会爆发,掩盖真相会让他们看起来更糟。一些大学甚至在得知应聘者遭到过虐待指控的情况下,仍然雇佣他们,对招募进行保密,不惜以学生受到伤害为代价。

你的毒性也可以向上蔓延;如果你是喜欢骚扰权力较小的人,你也会乐在其中的。实际上,你没有必要成为天才学者或管理者。一旦有足够多的人相信你的不可替代性,那么每个人都会从众。为了保持这一点,大学会贬低那些更聪明、更有生产力或更志同道合的同事和学生的工作。这些人反过来会认为自己低人一等,并且会忙于收拾破碎的信心而不会对你构成威胁。

你的轻率——有时,甚至是你的罪行——将不会被揭露出来。因为他们害怕受到诉讼威胁,害怕承担后果,丧失机会。人们越是屈服于恐惧,就越会被牵连到共同的罪恶感中,并努力保持沉默,不管他们是否愿意。过去相处得很好的同事们,会因为没能一起反抗你而分道扬镳。

向上毒性可以在任何行业发挥作用,但在几乎没有其他选择的职业中尤其有效。如果你的学生和同事想离开你,这可能意味着付出惨重代价:把家人转移到另一个国家,甚至完全放弃他们一生的工作。大多数人被迫长期与你打交道。

向上毒性有许多附加好处。以牺牲同事为代价,利用服务任务来让自己受益,你会神奇地发现自己做的事情更少了。你不会得到某些职责,因为你不被信任。当然,你也可以忽略剩余的工作;你的同事会学会进行相应的补偿。

如果你持续地困扰别人,你也会逐渐不再需要培养学生,他们会告诉学生避开你。你的同事会多带学生,以保护他们免受你的骚扰。最终,你将只指导一组精选的助手,他们总是听从你的吩咐。如果你表现得足够恶劣,你甚至可能赢得大奖:带薪休假,不用教学。你可以趁休假时间发表更多的研究,提高你的天才声誉。

还不清楚怎么做吗?尝试遵循以下10条简单的规则:

  1. 1.培养强大的朋友。获得尽可能多的出版机构和学术团体的权力,并利用它们来提升你派系的影响力。

    2.不要为任何不重要的人做任何事。

    3.找一个不太成功的学者,他会害怕你并且钦佩你。奉承他们,让他们成为你的伙伴,指望他们诋毁你的同事,维护你的声誉。

    4.粉碎有潜力超越你的学生的信心。或者和他们上床。或者两者兼而有之。

    5.在你不再拥有对学生和员工的支配权力后,操纵他们,让他们觉得他们欠你的。做出令人愤慨、不道德的承诺,他们会因为接受或拒绝而感到难过。

    6.推广零和成功模式。任何人的收获都是你的损失。声称你的学生的作品是你自己的,并把他们最好的想法重新分配给你最喜欢的人。失败者才会一门心思去合作呢。

    7.有条不紊地说同事的坏话,这样你就能提高自己的地位。把竞争对手学者的学生拒之门外。嘲笑那些学生没出息的竞争对手。

    8.做一盏煤气灯,传播任何反抗你的人的错误信息。投诉“谣言工厂”和“猎巫”,指责你的批评者心怀嫉妒。

    9.大声问为什么没有人愿意正式站出来证实虐待你的谣言。如果有人克服了恐惧,那么就称他们为疯子。

    10.厚颜无耻地撒谎。指责他人撒谎。

遵循这些规则后,你就可以得到大量的注意力、时间和资源,而不受惩罚。当然,也会有批评者。他们会抱怨大学应该培养人才,而不是保护施虐者,研究和教育应该服务于社会,而不是满足少数以自我为中心的人。他们甚至可能呼吁打破阴谋性的沉默,这种沉默将优秀的人赶出学术界,并使他们的精神崩溃。

别担心。他们甚至害怕分享这篇文章。

伊琳娜·杜米特雷斯库是波恩大学从事英国中世纪研究的教授。

后记

Print headline: Want to get ahead in academia? Try adopting a toxic personality

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
注册
Please 登录 or 注册 to read this article.

相关文章

Reader's comments (11)

Love it :)
Are you me? Is it defamation if I tag my uni in this?
These days the Machiavellian manoeuvrings of our more psychopathic (ruthless, conscience-free, manipulative, self-oriented) colleagues are well understood and easy to describe. Just yesterday an inter-state visitor told me that she thought her Vice-Chancellor was highly psychopathic as judged against ten of the most proto-typical characteristics of the ‘corporate’ or ‘primary’ psychopath. These people are adept at getting to the top, where, because of their power and influence, they can do enormous damage. The best way to stop them is probably at the recruitment stage, but shallow interview-based selection methods will not achieve this. Deep investigation is needed and while this is costly in terms of time, it aces any type of cost-benefit analysis. Post-appointment the psychopathic are extremely difficult to deal with and a team effort is needed because individual action is too dangerous. These people are ruthless and vindictive when challenged. Nevertheless, potentially fruitful areas to investigate include past plagiarism, pornography use during work hours, undeserved promotion of cronies, sexual coercion and philandering in the workplace, CV fraud, inflated expense claims, huge falls in job satisfaction together with high levels of staff exit behaviour among those who work closely with the psychopathic individual and an increase in the signing of non-disclosure agreements among those who do leave. This is emotionally costly and often damaging for those employees who get involved and detrimental to the institution and society.
Except for 1 and 9, this is exactly my PhD advisor. Or should I say, the guy I try to cut out of my life as much as possible but he better sign my paperwork when the time comes, since the university environment gives me zero defenses or recourse or ability to change advisors without throwing away years of work.
I've never thought of university life like this. But when I was working at Us Career Institute reviews department I really did not understand lots of things... Now it's little more clearly, thanks to the list of your rules.
During my 10 years as a Lecturer at a Western Australian University I found these same issues/problems rearing their ugly head. I was discriminated against, harassed, and bullied by senior staff because I refused to accept bribes from students ($10,000 for an "A", or an "A" for a lay). I was sacked as a result, but being an independent person was able to survive by returning to buying and selling Small Businesses, which was my area of expertise. Being smarter than the Boss does not work in the Australian University sector, but creates opportunities in the real world.
Why are only white men pictured? Women are often the victims of such toxicity but they can also be the perpetrators.
@susanne_brander_oregonstate_edu Because white men occupy most leadership roles and have privilege/power to enable this type of environment. Anyways, this article laid it all out. Very relevant to my industry.
White women/Amy Cooper can be snake attacks too.
Black guy, america, STEM, outside attacks, threats of violence, constant denial, newly appointed federal judges, no escape, no way in, no way out, guess ill start selling drugs, rapping, or be a token... somewhere... somewhere
Might i add other rules to stamp out African Americans from STEM.... Make sure you interrupt any thing they say when in the presence of any one who may be a neoliberal... Don't hear what they say... they are subhuman... so point out any inconsistency... people suffering from white guilt will have some burden relieved and will be grateful to you for it... the closet racist will say to themselves 'they get it!!' and will admire you.. n-word lovers will try to criticize but there is always rule 8... hell you will always use it against an cis n-word male who doesnt know his place... It's America!! If there is anything we can do it is that!! Is that all we can do? ... doesn't matter that's been enough since i can remember :)