Doret de Ruyter and Joke van Saane have plenty to say about ‘the ideal university’. In their respective roles and with a deep sense of intrinsic motivation, they are committed to changing the recognition and rewards system for academic staff. They know that this is a long process, but they agree on one thing: it is worth continuing to strive for an ideal university.

(Read this interview in Dutch)

As chair of the Recognition and Rewards committee of the Dutch Denominational Universities (Nederlandse Levensbeschouwelijke Universiteiten, NLU), a position she shares with Prof. Bram de Muynck of the Theological University of Apeldoorn, Doret has been closely involved in drawing up the NLU’s vision for a new way of recognising and rewarding academic staff. ‘Developing a vision for the NLU was an interesting and inspiring process. We obviously had to deal with differences both within our university and between the four partner universities (University for Humanistic Studies, Theological University of Apeldoorn, Theological University of Kampen and Protestant Theological University), but we also shared a lot of similarities in terms of what characterises an ideal university.’

All four universities felt a strong sense of urgency. Joke says that having a well-organised recognition and rewards system is part of a university’s job: ‘I believe in science that has time to think and move forward, but I also believe in science that matters in society. The dissemination of such scientific knowledge really brings added value to society. If you reduce the quality of science and academic practice to the number of publications and the amount of funding acquired, then you are not doing justice to your duty as a university.’ Doret adds: ‘The Recognition and Rewards programme is desperately needed: we can see that the workload is disproportionate. On all fronts (research, education, valorisation), high demands are placed on staff. Everyone is working very hard, and many are working too hard.’

Doret: ‘I’ve been in academia for 30 years and I’m used to the fact that you usually work more hours than your official contract. You do this because, as an academic, you are intrinsically motivated: you love your job, so you just enjoy doing it. But what was once optional and voluntary has now become almost always required.’

Eight characteristics of an ideal university

The NLU’s vision describes eight characteristics of an ideal university. As stated in the vision, the ideal university obviously does not exist and will never be fully realised. But aiming for this ideal will bring us closer.

The ideal university:

1. Forms a (learning) community;
2. Connects education and research;
3. Shares research results with others in an accessible manner;
4. Encourages peer review and cooperation;
5. Focuses on content and quality;
6. Thinks in terms of what staff and students need to flourish;
7. Appeals to the intrinsic motivation of staff by tapping into their talents;
8. Is led by development-oriented leaders.

These characteristics are described in further detail in the NLU’s vision document.

Joke: ‘The idea of Recognition and Rewards is so good because it goes back to why we have universities in the first place. It shouldn’t just be about numbers, but about what we really value about academia.’ The eight characteristics are also discussed in meetings of the Executive Board of the University for Humanistic Studies (UvH) and in the joint discussions of all four executive boards within the NLU. ‘These characteristics are great, manageable topics to discuss, so we try to regularly reflect on them in meetings to keep our sights on where we want to go.’

The word ‘flourish’ and the concept of helping each other stand out in the characteristics from the vision. From the NLU’s perspective, however, these are very obvious aspects of an ideal university. Doret: ‘These characteristics fit perfectly with our type of universities. At the UvH, for example, our research (and education) is focused on a meaningful life and the humanisation of society.’ Joke adds: ‘If you also look at the theological universities, their aim is first and foremost to contribute to the community: in other words, helping others rather than pursuing personal gain. We see symptoms of unhealthy competition as well, of course, but at the core we are aware of the fact that we have to do it together.’ The small-scale nature of the universities plays a role in this. In a smaller organisation, it is important to openly discuss how positions are filled. Joke: ‘We don’t have the luxury of shifting positions and creating space for everyone, so we have to look for solutions together.’ Career differentiation is a core element within the Recognition and Rewards programme, but at the same time it is also a challenge for these universities. ‘Since we have limited opportunities for advancement, our staff must be able to continue their career elsewhere and still be evaluated in the same way. That is why it’s very important for all Dutch universities to make this major cultural change together,’ Joke explains.

The small-scale nature of the NLU member universities was also helpful in drawing up the characteristics and vision, however. ‘While developing the vision, we were able to ask everyone what they thought was important. And during discussions of the vision, all staff at each university had the opportunity to share their ideas,’ Doret says. Doret and Joke describe engaging in dialogue, eliminating obstacles and identifying directions for the future as a pleasant and open process at NLU.

‘As soon as you start getting close, things get exciting.’

The next step is to implement the vision and take the first steps towards change, but this daunting task is easier said than done. As soon as it starts getting concrete, things get exciting. The way a person is evaluated now might change, after all, and what does that mean for someone’s job? The tangible and visible steps will certainly raise justified questions and concerns. Joke: ‘What also makes it difficult for us is that we can’t try something out on a smaller scale, such as within an individual faculty, for example. We are too small for that, so for us it’s also a kind of “all or nothing” situation.’

In our conversation with Doret and Joke, there is an important topic that cannot be ignored: leadership. What exactly is academic leadership?

Joke explains: ‘For me, this is related to two things: an organisational factor and a human factor. On the one hand, a leader takes responsibility for the greater whole and not just his or her own position. That means really looking after the whole university. At the same time, a leader takes active interest in others by coaching and encouraging them. Encouragement doesn’t mean pushing someone in a specific direction, but helping them to take developmental steps.’

Joke talks about ‘academic service’ and being aware of what is going on in society, what lies ahead and how this relates to the organisation. Doret mentions personal leadership as another important component. ‘To be a good leader, it’s also important to question yourself, reflect and be open to other ideas and perspectives.’ With Doret, who is also Director of Education at the UvH, the link between leadership and education is immediately clear. What does good leadership in education look like?

Doret: ‘Leadership in education primarily involves lecturers treating students in the way described above. In a sense, the lecturer is there to serve the students. Which does not mean blindly following the students’ wishes, of course: education is also fed by your own expertise and educational vision. But as a lecturer, you try to help students develop so that they can flourish.’

Once again, there is a natural link to Recognition and Rewards, as both Doret and Joke say it is important to acknowledge and appreciate teaching more. Teaching is still too often viewed as something that people want to get out of so that they’ll have more time for research. ‘We need good leaders in this area, too: people who really believe that teaching careers deserve appreciation. ’

Doret adds: ‘Education and research are both important social components of a university. It’s important that science makes a contribution to society. By the way, this doesn’t mean that every research project has to have an immediate impact on society. Slow science also needs space and time to develop and think through things that can deliver results in the longer term.’ Joke adds: ‘That’s why working in teams is so important. A team has people who are good at making the connection to society, but also people who can do research and think on a more conceptual and fundamental level. Each type complements the other, and that is a major advantage of working in teams.’

The hour flew by in our passionate conversation with Joke and Doret. Joke shares her final thoughts: ‘We realise that this is a huge cultural shift which is easier on paper than in reality, but it is so worth it. This change brings us back to the essence of academia.’

Doret de Ruyter has been professor of Education at the University of Humanistic Studies since 1 June 2018 and Director of Education since 1 September 2020. Prior to that, she spent fifteen years working as a professor of Philosophy of Education at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Doret is one of the two chairs of the NLU’s Recognition and Rewards committee. Flourishing as a goal of upbringing and education is one of her research and teaching themes.

Prof. Joke van Saane is professor of Meaning and Leadership. Since 1 July 2019, she has served as rector and chair of the Executive Board of the University of Humanistic Studies. She previously worked at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. From 2014 to 2019, she was professor of Religious Psychology and Education Theology & Religion Studies and Education portfolio holder at the Faculty of Religion and Theology of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

On Friday June 4 all members of the Executive Boards of the universities met in the General Assembly. One of the topics discussed during this meeting was recognition and rewards. In this blog Pieter Duisenberg, President of the VSNU reflects on this discussion.

---

‘The big societal challenges of the moment call for more cooperation and for a multidisciplinary, impactful approach to science with fitting recognition and rewards. By way of the above-mentioned activities, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU), the Dutch Research Council (NWO), ZonMw, the Netherlands Federation of University Medical Centres (NFU) and the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) are boosting the development of such an approach.’

At the VSNU’s General Assembly* of Friday 4 June, I briefly closed my eyes to think back to the beginnings of the movement for recognition and rewards – and yes, you can definitely call it a movement by now! The words in italics above were the closing sentences of the first Recognition & Rewards position paper of 2018. This was the forerunner of Room for Everyone’s Talent (Ruimte voor ieders talent).

 

That is when people started taking the first steps. Progress was also made during the COVID-19 pandemic, which is quite an achievement.

A few examples:

• Several universities have written their own vision document.
• Recognition and Rewards is being widely discussed.
• The SEP has become the Strategy Evaluation Protocol and has incorporated elements of Recognition and Rewards.
• NWO and ZonMw have switched to a ‘narrative CV’ with fewer hard metrics and more emphasis on impact.
• The ‘Faculty of Impact’, offering a post-doc programme focusing on valorisation, was launched.
• The example of the Recognition and Rewards movement is being followed in Europe: the European University Association has included the ‘diversification of research careers’ in its strategy, and the ‘attractiveness of researchers’ careers’ is a key component of the renewed European Research Area.

More and more, I am realising that the three pillars of the VSNU agenda, ‘Knowledge is our Future’ (Kennis is onze Toekomst), are closely interlinked. These pillars are:

1) working together to create societal impact and earning capacity;

2) innovation towards an open and connected university;

3) room for talent.

Pillars one and two are dependent on pillar three. This third pillar is the basic prerequisite for our university, our future! But Recognition and Rewards is also mutually dependent on what happens in other tracks, such as open science, the acceleration agenda for innovation in education, the programme for ambitious valorisation and, notably, funding. The level of funding and the way in which funding instruments are used are crucial for creating room for talent. After all, allowing the talents of our academics to flourish requires more peace and continuity, so they can contribute successfully to scholarly research, academic teaching and societal developments. Accordingly, we want there to be less emphasis on funding applications in careers. Greater differentiation in career paths means we want to create opportunities for academics with a variety of profiles. This requires funding, and we are committed to securing it. We advocate a funding model that matches societal ambitions and the diversity of these ambitions, rather than the current distribution model based on numbers. We are aiming for ‘rolling grants’ for more independent research and sector plans for strengthening and deepening disciplines.

A productive discussion we had with Board members at the General Assembly of 4 June showed that they are keenly aware of the link between talent and funding. It would be great if the parameters for the distribution of funds at the national, university and faculty level were to help the transition in Recognition and Rewards along. How do we translate recognition and rewards priorities into financial decisions at institutions? If we attach so much importance to interdisciplinarity, how do we put it into practice when it comes to sector plans and institutional plans? If we can invest more in direct government funding, how do we simultaneously reduce high application rates and increase success rates?

In short, the recognition and rewards movement is crucial to our future. Both in the Netherlands and internationally, it has got off to a flying start. But the road is long, the contingencies are considerable and complex and the movement immediately gives rise to a slew of new questions. We will solve these issues together: with each other, with our partners NWO, ZonMw, NFU and the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, with our international friends and with ministries and the political arena.

*General Assembly: two or three times a year, all members of the Executive Boards meet in the General Assembly. This is where the joint strategy is determined, aimed at increasing and anchoring the quality of research-oriented higher education, scholarly research and their impact on society.

The animation below shows the dilemmas as discussed during the General Assembly

 

Read article in Dutch

‘Academic structures do not promote collaboration; you enter a funnel only intended for climbing the academic ladder.’

Jasper Sluijs is assistant professor with the Public Economic Law chair group at Utrecht University School of Law. In 2012, Jasper was awarded his PhD cum laude by Tilburg Law School, subsequent to being a Fulbright Scholar at the Georgia Institute of Technology and the University of Pennsylvania. At the Recognition & Rewards Festival in January 2021, Jasper felt himself to be among likeminded academics, and during the speed dating session with Rianne Letschert, he shared his experiences transitioning from practice to academia. The question is what the supposed ‘gap in his CV’ yielded him after five years’ worth of practical experience. We met with Jasper to interview him about his experiences.

Looking back on his time as a PhD candidate, Jaspers views it in a positive light. ‘I really loved delving deeply into a subject. Since my research topic (on the necessity of European broadband regulation) was highly relevant to policymaking as well as being untouched in an academic sense, I really had the chance to be part of the debate in society and fully engage with policymaking. I didn’t have to stick to my desk but was invited to speak at conferences and expert meetings. I was able to break new ground and really have an impact. At the time, I thought that this was something every PhD candidate could do.’

Jasper did experience his PhD track to be a solitary affair. ‘You’re only responsible for the work you publish and the courses you teach. I never really learned to collaborate and carry professional responsibility. Working on a PhD is like entering a funnel, and it gets even lonelier when you proceed to a post-doc.’ Jasper chose to forego post-doc opportunities and leave academia for private practice.

‘I still don’t understand why they hired me’ Jasper confesses. ‘As far as professional skills were concerned I was a novice. You might be pretty smart if you hold a PhD, but in a professional sense I didn’t have a clue. Project management, billable hours and working efficiently – these things were all completely new to me, I was slow as a snail.’

Jasper worked in consultancy, where has was expected to finish projects and draft reports on a monthly basis that he was used to spending a year on as an academic.  He learned to deal with the major financial interests of clients. ‘I learned things that I never would have in the academic world, such as collaborating with others. Only as a team will it be possible to meet your client’s demands. Academia is less focused on collaboration: you need to distinguish yourself from your peers to land that research grant or postdoc position.’

Despite a somewhat rocky start, Jasper was able to forge a career in consultancy. But this meant that he became increasingly less involved with substance, which is a primary interest to him. ‘That got me thinking. Management may be rewarding, but not without the opportunity to work on substantive issues too.’ Jasper began considering a transition back to academia and eventually ended up at Utrecht University.

‘They were willing to take gamble on me in Utrecht, that’s truly what it felt like.’

By then, Jasper had worked in private practice for five years. He found out that in academia this is referred to as ‘a gap in your CV’. ‘I gave up a permanent, well-paid position for a one-year contract. But it was what I wanted: I was in search of more substance and autonomy, and now I have the opportunity to voice an opinion without being tied to a client.’ Jasper has been with Utrecht University for nearly three years now, yet he still regularly has to explain ‘that gap in his CV’. ‘I gained a lot of relevant project management experience, so I know my stuff. Still, not having published for five years is considered more important in determining whether I can lead a major research project by external funders.’

Jasper does feel truly at home at Utrecht University. Throughout the interview he emphasises that this is not a negative tale, but one of opportunity. ‘I enjoy working here and feel appreciated for what I do. But of course I still want to move up the chain to have more meaningful impact. For now I’m trying to set a good example organically by seeking out collaboration and working in a more project-based fashion. I would love to foster sustainable change at my university, so that collaboration becomes the norm, not the exception.’

‘One of the greatest things there is, is to see the penny drop in students.’

Working solo on research only yields Jasper a modicum of satisfaction. ‘You work on something for quite some time, but the satisfaction is a lot slower in coming. A year down the line, your article is published and then that’s it.’ Jasper gains more satisfaction from collaborating during research, linking research to teaching practice and attempting to achieve societal impact in research projects. ‘One of the greatest things there is, is to see the penny drop in students. And we are doing pretty well for our students. We give a lot of assignments that they have to collaborate on, both during tutorials and as an alternative to a classic exam. But then there comes the thesis, followed by the solitary funnel taking you from PhD to postdoc to research grant and ultimately professor.’

The funnel means that many people (re-)entering academia with a non-standard CV are unable to adjust and end up leaving. ‘This leaves the group of solitary career academics over-represented, which leads to a kind of monoculture.’

When Jasper heard about the Recognition and Rewards programme, he felt acknowledged. At the Recognition & Rewards Festival he spoke with others who find it important that meaningful change take place in academia, which left Jasper feeling he was on a bandwagon. ‘I really think it’s a good development that the MERIT model is receiving attention in Utrecht at various levels, and that it is leading to action.’ It comes as no surprise to Jasper that this is only happening one step at a time. According to him, this is an organisational change that should be expected to take five to ten years. The Utrecht University website has all the latest developments concerning the Recognition and Rewards programme, including the new vision on it.

Where does Jasper see himself a decade down the line?

‘By then there should no longer be a two-track system with research on the one hand and teaching on the other, and the prevalent academic culture will prioritise collaboration. Fundamental research will still be very important, but ideally no longer in isolation. Of course you need to be able to do things on your own, but if the premise is intense collaboration, you can enrich each other as researchers.’

This also means putting other policies in place, with the incentives organised differently than now. ‘Currently people are being trained who don’t really know how wonderful it can be to work together. They distinguish themselves with solitary work. And this is not in keeping with the diversity in qualities that the modern academic truly requires.’

In the meantime, Jasper is continuing to foster cooperation and share his experiences with anyone willing to lend an ear.

---

This article was published in Dutch as well, see here.