MY NEW BOOK, THE THRIVING PROFESSOR, is now available.
Hello
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
I hope to continue much of what I was writing about in my previous blog, scholarssurvival.blogspot.com But now in a more regular weekly or daily column, with posts no more than 1000 words, and likely 750. Let us begin.
MK
Empirically, Marginal tenure cases lead to marginal careers, or disappointing ones. Probability is above 95%, maybe 98%. They take much longer than other cases to be promoted to full, if they are so promoted at all. Rarely does a tenure turndown then have a distinguished scholarly career. Surely there is a stigma to being turned down, but that seems not to be be the issue. Perhaps 1-2% of turndowns have distinguished subsequent careers. Slow progress from associate to full is only rarely accompanied with the production of a major work when they come up for promotion. Probability is 5% at most. In general, we make many more mistaken positive decisions than mistaken negative ones, the ratio being perhaps 10:1. The basic principle is that being a faculty member of a university that is on the rise is a rare opportunity. Mistaken appointments and promotions preclude our appointing more talented scholars. And there is a agglomeration effect, more exc...
Seymour Cray was the premier supercomputer designer. His firm was Cray Research, after he left CDC. John Rollwagen, his CEO,... The real message was something I always told our people. Namely that we had exclusive access to Seymour's disruptive ability to create uniquely powerful computers from quite common elements. And that we, in turn, uniquely organized ourselves to build and sell as many of those machines as possible in competition with some of the largest companies on the planet. We succeeded by embracing Seymour's disruptive talent and then singlemindedly organizing around it. I always reminded the Crayons that our success came from that total commitment to supercomputers and if there came a time when we became the disrupted rather than the disrupters, it would be time to move on with happy memories and great resumes.
Would we be better off were we to swear off apocalyptic thinking? I have spent much of my research career thinking about apocalyptic possibilities . Each possibility has passed out of consideration , although the arguments have merit, and even the evidence is persuasive. The big question is when to constrain behavior, and if there is ever a time when it is "too late" to act . Also, we are rather weak at predicting technological developments compared to sketching apocalypses, so the apocalypse tends to have a better argument than a more wait-and-see policy, or perhaps a deliberate research effort to develop those technologies (which may be a matter of societal arrangements rather than a material discovery). More generally, t he prospect of apocalypse is used to justify policies and behavior that would otherwise seem not so prudent. The possibility of doom, if taken as a matter of decision analysis , is fraught with uncer...
Comments
Post a Comment