So the death of Stefan Grimm may not have been prevented even 鈥渋f revised policies on performance management had been in place鈥 (鈥New policy may not have prevented Imperial scholar鈥檚 suicide, inquest told鈥, News, 9 April).
Surely what this tells us is that Imperial College London does not need better 鈥減erformance management鈥 policies, but rather an abolition of the performance targets that equate good performance with financial targets of grant income. I have already given my opinions on such targets in my piece 鈥The big grant money. The big papers. Are we missing anything?鈥 (Opinion, 15 January). I am distressed to find that Imperial just doesn鈥檛 get it, and seems to think that it can avoid future tragedies by just 鈥渕anaging鈥 people and 鈥渟upporting鈥 them in dealing with the crazy targets that they are confronted with. In particular, it seems to have no understanding of the fact that there is a good element of randomness in whose grants get funded.
Placing so much emphasis on annual funding targets is bad for science, creates a dysfunctional incentive structure and is even worse for the individuals who try to do good science.
Dorothy Bishop
Professor of developmental neuropsychology
University of Oxford
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to 罢贬贰鈥檚 university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?