I am gobsmacked that a University such as Cambridge could have such lax appointment procedures that someone with Arday's credentials could get anywhere near a professorial chair!
A few years ago I served on the governing board of a university department within the Social Science Faculty, at a European University which was a lot like Cambridge. During my time, I was involved in the appointment of a few professors and the appointments followed a very strict process that could take up to a couple of years to get a person in place.
Step 1: a professor within the department was appointed to manage the process and the role was advertised.
Step 2: the initial paper sift to remove applicants that didn't meet minimum requirements for the post. We had some fantasists as well - I especially remember a retired high school Social Studies teacher who used to apply for every senior lecturer/professor post on the basis of his B.Ed. from the 1970s (no masters, no PhD, no research).
Step 3: (this is the step that took time) an academic expert panel was convened (the professor plus subject expert professors from other Universities) to assess academic ability from the research publication history submitted for consideration. Weighting is given the the quality of publication - so higher weight is given to articles in top academic publications, then other journals/publishers and non-academic publication the lowest. Candidates would be expected to have made some theoretical/methodological contribution to the discipline. So a genuine peer review of the candidates' research quality and originality by experts in the field. The panel ranks the candidates according to academic merit.
Step 4: the top 3-6 candidates are invited to the next "in person" stage. There are interviews with representatives from department/experts/faculty. Then, because teaching ability is also required, the 3-6 candidates also have to give short sample lectures plus a Q&A.
Step 5: it is first now - step 5 - that any DEI characteristics are considered and a final ranking is produced. DEI was usually used only if it is close between candidates (and the one time it was applied it was a total shitshow). Finally position/s are offered.
The sorry mess at Cambridge shows the failure of the social media approach to recruitment. The department wanted someone who "looked" good on the website and ticked the right boxes without having a rigorous process to ensure that the recommended applicant had the right abilities. Obviously Arday must take responsibility for his own lies and fakery.
The real victims in this are
- the academics he plagiarised - their research was stolen by Arday by a University that promoted style over substance because they didn't "look right"
- the minority/disabled academics who will now find themselves under even more intense microscopes
- the students who have been defrauded out of £30,000 in tuition fees for a substandard education. Sadly many of these students will be black/disabled who chose to study there precisely because they believed the hype that Jason Arday was an academic superstar ... yet ended up with a "professor" who sat on the desk and talked about himself rather than teaching the course content.