Any solutions that work? Power imbalances and bullying in academia

[Awtri]

I’m getting increasingly despondent about how common exploitation and bullying seem to be in academia, especially senior academics bullying casual staff/post docs/phd students. There’s such an unhealthy power dynamic inherent in the supervisor/phd student or PI/temp post doc relationship, meaning early career academics don’t report bad behaviour, think it’s normal, internalise it as a problem with them, or leave. Obviously #notallsupervisors but enough for it to be an issue.

I wondered if anyone has seen examples of initiatives which have helped create a more healthy working culture with phds and post docs? I’m thinking of anything which addresses the power imbalance or promotes an open culture. Where it’s not just luck if you get a decent supervisor but there are genuine safeguards. Also, has anyone known a senior academic ever face any consequences for this kind of behaviour??

I’m mid career myself, and did experience some of this kind of behaviour as an ECR, but increasingly realising that was not unusual at all. Now I’m in a more senior position I don’t want to reproduce these same patterns.

Lonely, precarious ECR here - was just wondering about this the other day. I think it is the transient/precarious nature of these roles and academia in general. As either a post-doc or PhD student, you're in a fixed-term role with limited funding - these aren't meant to be permanent positions. We're also expected to be hyper-mobile and uproot our lives for the best position wherever that might be. I think this can make some people not really make an effort as you'll be gone soon. On the other hand, this transience makes some male academics I've met feel that they can prey on Phd students/post-docs because they know they will be leaving soon/are not permanent.

Realised I didn't think about solutions! Bleak, but we have a warning system where we warn each other discretely about not going for coffee/dinner with X, Y, Z (predatory academic).

I think a wider warning system is important more generally - you only get a short interview to get an insight into what your PI/supervisor/employer might be like, so having people with prior insight of these people/places is so key. But if you're desperate for a permanent job as many of us are, you find yourself in a difficult position of accepting things that are good for your CV, but not so much for yourself IYSWIM

Sorry you’re in a tough space, hope it improves.

I think you’re right that community and communication are really important - and as you say doesn’t happen enough as people are moving around so much and are precarious. So much goes undetected - I don’t know what my colleagues are like to their research assistants or post docs most of the time- I know what they’re like to work with as a peer but that’s different.

I wasn’t specifically thinking about predatory behaviour, tho of course that’s exacerbated by all the same issues. Think there’s a much broader problem with senior academics viewing phds and ecrs as existing basically to enhance their own careers and egos, and not as people or researchers in their own right. And then turning nasty/bullying/dropping ecrs when they don’t comply in some way.

I think a key thing has to be to remove the single point of dependence - that students and ecrs feel their future is dependent on keeping this one person happy.

Our department (acctually the whole faculty) is arranged in groups that contain multiple PIs (there are 5 of us in my group). We are expected to work together snd strategically to progress the group, secure funding, etc. We all have junior colleagues who report directly to us but we are all very "visible" which means any dickish behaviour is pretty public so thats somewhat of a deterrent. All phd s must have a co supervisor so they are not only dependent on 1 person. The other relevant thing is im not in the uk and here we pay our juniors very well but our professor saleries are relatively low which helps somewhat with the power imbalance.

Does your department have any Athena SWAN initiatives? I'm the lead for our dept and very much see PGR/ECR welfare as part of this. As a pp said, supervisory teams help with PhD students, and we work quite hard to make sure postdocs are properly integrated into the department and have other roles, which means they have more opportunities to talk informally to people other than PIs, so I would hope we'd hear quite quickly if there was an issue - that openness in itself seems to discourage duck behaviour, though I have to be honest it hasn't completely stopped it, particularly with one senior male colleague who should definitely know better by now (insert emoji of choice here, gah). But at least there is support for those affected while we chip away at this guy's attitude! I realise that's a bit short on specific suggestions, but the culture of openness and collegiality does seem to be key. And a robust code of practice - citing the vitae concordat is quite helpful for PGRs? Just having a named role for a start gives people someone to go to. It's a not a fun role, but it is quite satisfying! That said, a major systemic problem as you mention is the precarity of ECR roles, and local initiatives are unlikely to change that (neither, sadly, is the Four Fights thing as currently being pursued, but don't get me started!). Nothing less than a radical overall of academia is needed for that, and no one really seems to have an appetite for that. In the meantime, it has to be the slow grind of culture change at a local level coupled with explicit codes of practice and guidelines, I think! Maybe UKRI could threaten to blacklist offenders (and/or their institutions?)? I'd be wary of unintended consequences there but maybe it's what we need!

Having supervisory teams is one counter to this- having several supervisors, plus having audits (we have them yearly) of how the relationships are going. That said, I think often students are intimidated by having two or three more senior people all at meetings scrutinising their work, and I preferred the one to one relationship with my supervisor, so there are disadvantages to having a team (one of my student tends to feel 'ganged up' on if we have a team meeting).

Another organusational thing (im in the sciences) is our Labs are shared and our shared offices for juniors and techs cross group boundaries. that reduces the chances of people getting isolated within a pi headed pyramid and ending up believeing dickish behaviour is normal or something they have to accept.

our dept has an active Post-grad tutor, and every student has a supervision team (primary, secondary + committee). if the student isn't happy or isn't progressing it is flagged to the PGT who can meet the student / impose conditions on the supervisor / allow the student to transfer to a different supervisor / find a solution.

some supervisors are certainly known to be tougher to work for than others, but I don't think any are unfair or impossible.