Just found out colleague refuses to make her publications available

[TryingToShitInPeace]

NC as this might be outing

We're all under huge pressure to publish 4 3-4* publications for REF and our work is increasingly being scrutinized to make sure we're getting there (published work is internally reviewed and rated and draft publications have to be internally reviewed before submission). I find this all very stressful but I understand why it needs to be done.

In line with REF guidelines, all published work needs to be uploaded to our repository so it's open access. Fine, we all do that.

However, today I found out that a senior professor is refusing to upload her work to the repository because she doesn't want it to be reviewed and rated. So her work is completely unusable for REF despite her having several high impact papers in top journals.

I'm completely gob-smacked and so pissed off that everyone else is working their arses off to get top publications and she's seemingly just allowed to get away with flatly refusing to make her work available.

This colleague has form for not being particularly collegiate and co-operative but still.. this is next level crazy.

Don't know why I'm posting really, there's no question! I'm just stunned and needed to vent.

There'll be institutional sanctions for not having open access for publications eligible/required OA for REF.

But not all REFable publications are required to be OA: books, book chapters, and stuff that can be legitimately embargoed.

Let your institution deal with it, I don't think you would be able to do this at mine, I think you would end up with a formal warning first time around and something more serious after that- submitting to the practice REF is part of our standard work practices, not an optional extra.

It's very hard to believe she won't be sanctioned.

It will be noticed but depending on how "bigcheese" she is there may not be sanctions. It's funny what you can get away with when your face fits or are chummy with head of school.

If they think she has 4* publications there is NO WAY she will be permitted not to make them REF-eligible.

My advice to you, OP, is don't waste your emotional energy. We've all got enough to do!

As somebody in a leadership position, I would say that nobody gets away with not producing REF outputs, not even those pulling in huge grants.

It's quite insulting to suggest that a head of school would apply different rules for such an important matter on the grounds of chumminess.

Ah yes, I forgot that there is no nepotism within academia .

Hilarious really. Who does she think pays her stipend? Your institution and ultimately tax payers through the gov & research councils. The egos in academia are astounding. Do profs really think that they are answerable to no one? That they can rinse the public purse and not produce/share their findings? Or does she think she's above an internal review process?

Of course there is nepotism within academia - most of us are women on this board and will have experienced boys club nepotism excluding us, for example. But nepotism just does not extend to opting out of the REF. As I wrote above, nobody - not even research superstars pulling in huge grants - is allowed to opt out of the REF in the institutions I know.

Do profs really think that they are answerable to no one?

Thanks for generalising from one specific individual to "profs" as a whole. Note that professors certainly cannot "rinse the public purse and not produce/share their findings" - if you do not publish and get grants, you can expect to be put into performance management in today's universities.

The professor discussed in the first email is producing and sharing her research, via publications. She is not making them REF eligible but they are certainly accessible to the research community as a whole and more widely than that in most cases (depending on open access policies of journals).

Actually, professors in the UK are monitored considreably more than in other countries - via NSS, TEF, REF, HEFCE membership, RCUK grant rates etc. With less time spent on monitoring each other, we would probably produce more for the country.

Or does she think she's above an internal review process?

Internal REF review processes are being used in some UK universities for determining who to target for redundancies.

Internal REF scores can suffer from considerable bias, with e.g. women in STEM departments often being systematically under-scored and work on the edges of subject panels being under-rated.

The rules for REF eligibility are somewhat ludicrous. A paper that is completely open access (publicly accessible online archive) but not in a university's repository may be deemed REF ineligible for not meeting the university's and REF's interpretation of open access, for example.

These are just examples of legitimate reasons for being concerned about this process and the use of the scores. It is not however clear from OP whether the professor does have valid concerns - and I would still be astonished if she can opt out of REF without severe consequences.

Can't you see the frustration that this kind of behaviour causes user? That (some) senior academics seem to flout or bend the rules that their junior colleagues abide by? Creating a supportive, collaborative & effective research environment should be a priority for everyone at every level, including profs who think they are more important than the institutions they serve.

We have no profs who are bigger than the REF/REF internal system, we are quite top heavy, there are a lot of fairly big hitters about and so within that environment, everyone is super REF compliant and has no choice- there is always a managerial layer above everyone!

Exactly Apple.
I wholly appreciate the eligibility issues but let's face it, there are many less than ideal happenings.
I'm not saying she has to suck it up but she could question it whilst supporting her colleagues.
I'm also not tarring everyone with the same brush, I'm probably just a cynical, grumpy old mare. It absolutely sucks when you break your neck to fulfill all these bloody criteria and find out that others are breezing along exactly as they wish.

I really don't think it likely she can get away with it. Not only will there be a layer of management above (Profs get annual reviews too), but funding bodies will also require her to be depositing her publications. As far as I'm aware, the only way not to is if there's an embargo required by a third party.

She doesn't get on at all with the HoD. They've have huge arguments, some in private but some very publicly in committee meetings.

HoD has, apparently, had this Prof in the office to warn her about not depositing her publications but it's not gone "formal" and the Dean (so above HoD) is apparently reluctant to make it formal because this professor is a great asset to the department

It just irks me that publications make me twitchy- I'm always worried I haven't got enough, they're not in good enough journals, they're not highly rated enough- yet this professor seems to think nothing of just flouting the rules that ECR staff religiously stick to.

As PP said, too much emotional energy being wasted but it's difficult to separate yourself sometimes.

She won't be a great asset if she's barred from any more funding as she's not complying with the rules! Try not to think about it. I know how frustrating it is when people don't pull their weight, but I really think she won't be able to get away with this.

That (some) senior academics seem to flout or bend the rules that their junior colleagues abide by?

But this simply does not happen in any UK institution I know of, with regards to issues such as REF. I wrote this many times above. As previous posters wrote, however senior you are within your own department you still report to somebody above you (Dean, Pro Vice Chancellor etc). Opting out of REF simply isn't allowed for anybody.

The OP's story must be lacking in some details. I would have zero hesitation in issuing a formal disciplinary warning to anybody who was deliberately not complying with REF rules. (In my own institution disciplinary warnings have even been given to people who accidentally missed deadlines for uploading publications.) Nobody is an asset to the department if they are not producing REF eligible outputs and also thus reducing eligibility for future funding.

I sympathise and find many aspects of working in HE extremely frustrating and unfathomable (and I previously worked for the NHS ) however I think for your own well-being you will probably have to file this in a mental box marked 'extremely annoying but can't do anything about'. Then make sure you get a shed-load of promotions and one day you will be able to fix things like this

Agree it sounds as though there must be more to this than is meeting your eye, OP. My first three ideas are variants on the idea that this prof (and perhaps someone above her, hence no action, but not yet you and other colleagues, hence outrage) knows that she won't be with you by the census date, so these publications won't be eligible anyway (oh, or will that change with Stern?) Maybe she will retire, leave, or even die shortly?

I'm amazed the university aren't doing more. Who's funding her work as aside from ref there are funder mandates to consider. Also what about co authors, are they depositing the work?

There must be more to it if she has that level of diplomatic immunity.
Does she bring in a massive amount of grant funding? Is she on tele a lot? Does her husband donate to the university?
We are all equal except when we are not.

Yes, filing this under "Annoying but Can't be Helped"

She brings in funding from third sector organisations and government departments directly rather than RCUK.

I don't know about her co-authors, I think she publishes a lot with non-academic people who obviously aren't bothered about REF.

She's a government adviser, she's on TV a lot and she set up her own charity off the back of her research. She often invited on research trips and collaborations all over the world. So she's up there in impact terms.

She's not likely to retire or die any time soon.

She may move on but I'm not sure that's a given enough for the university not to do anything about it. She's only been at this university for about 5 years.

I'm sure there is more to this story but that's what I know.

Tbh if she is genuinely making herself REF ineligible she is shooting herself in the foot. It doesn't matter how impacty she is if she cannot be submitted.

I am an HoD and this would be a disciplinary followed by regrading to teaching-only if she didn't pull her socks up by our internal census deadline.

Very strange - perhaps she just doesn't care?
Maybe she has had the 'Go on and fire me' conversation and the Dean or whoever has just backed down?

Apple - re tax and "stipends" and tax-payers.... in many institutions, it is international students who pay ££££ who support a great chunk of the faculty.

In term of the anti-REF prof - do not waste energy on this. There is no doubt she will face consequences, and she has probably made her own evaluation. There are some vocal opponents of the REF, who disagree with principles and processes - she may be one of these.

Accountability is one thing - obeying a crazy system which, in my glorious institution, has led to massive redundancies last round based on "REFability", appointment of 4 star idiots who refuse to teach, less opportunities for ECR to move into positions in our institutions [noone likes to share outputs], regrading and new "teaching only" contracts to anyone on less than 3, is another.

Maybe she strongly objects?