The Civil Responsibility

The design of structures viz. buildings, dams, flyovers, towers is an intellectually challenging job. While it is obvious that the construction begins from the bottom, with mother Earth bearing the entire load of the structure, the design of a structure begins from the top. For every structure, there are live loads (e.g. the humans) and the dead loads (the weight of the structure itself). For very tall structures, there are wind loads, and for seismically active areas, there is the seismic load. 

Each of these load calculations for designing are done according to the IS CODES (Bureau of Indian Standards). And no, they are not trivial! Each of these IS codes goes through multiple rounds of discussions amongst experts, references to international practices, and updates on material properties. For example, the property of steel hardening after crossing the elastic limit has given rise to the limit state design, which is the recent practice of design. 

Each combination of design process and the implementation process, is a project. Now one can say that projects have different modes of execution for example AGILE, KANBAN, SPRINT, SCRUM, etc. For Civil Engineering projects the CPM / PERT method has been found the best amongst practitioners of construction. CPM is the critical path method, and PERT is the Programme Evaluation and Review Technique. The difference between AGILE and PERT, for example is that while changing requirements can change the nature of the product which is handled by AGILE, PERT talks about the uncertainties, for example material or labour shortage, supply chain problem etc. Therefore, AGILE is suitable for software development, while PERT is suitable for construction methods. Of course this is based on the current studies. 

Now the design process has a tremendous effect on the implementation process. Typically, in Civil Engineering, a drawing or plan is proposed with all dimensions, after which a design is proposed with strengths of materials (viz. concrete and steel), and the net material requirement, for those proposed dimensions, as well as the dimensions of the reinforcements. The design is done from the top to the bottom. First the top floor is designed, and then the next to the top, till we reach the ground floor and finally the foundation. In terms of construction, the slab rests on the beams, and transfers the load onto the beams. The beams then transfer the load to the columns. Finally, the columns transfer the load to the foundation. 

Now let us consider some examples. Suppose that the design is given for a concrete strength of 25M, and during the implementation, it is decided that 20M will be used, with the same dimensions this can be dangerous for the safety of the structure, even though safety factors are considered in the design. On the other hand, if it is felt at a later stage that a large hall will be required to hold big events, and that hall should be without the columns, then the slab above the hall (its roof) should be pre-tensioned or it should be bracketed. If this is not done, then the particular slab can collapse, causing harm to the people underneath. But, if a building is already present with its slabs and columns, and one requires a bigger hall without the columns, can we chop off one or multiple columns? 

As soon as one removes the columns (one or many), the load distribution physics will go haywire. It will obviously result in a part of or the entire building collapsing, owing to creating a HUGE moment of inertia. One can be surprised because this doesn’t happen in jenga, where the blocks are gradually removed to make a structure taller. In Civil Engineering, we aren’t playing jenga, we are dealing with the lives of hundreds and thousands of people. Therefore, utmost care should be taken regarding all decisions. While we keep on seeing those weirdly shaped houses on the internet, thinking that they could be real fun, a Civil engineer has to burn his midnight oil to ensure the safety of the people. 

Tragedies and Indifference

 Way back in December 1984 at Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India, owing to gross negligence of maintenance norms (according to several reports), a poisonous gas Methyl Isocyanide leaked into the atmosphere. Over the next several hours, days, months and years, this leak led to extreme poisoning of the natural resources, several people developed cancer. The agency responsible for this gross negligence was an Indian subsidiary of Union Carbide viz. UCIL. 

Owing to lack of efforts from several corners of governance, the people of Bhopal did not get suitable compensation for the damages that happened to their health. Furthermore, the toxic waste at the site of was not removed owing to lack of initiative. Consequently, several non-government organizations and student groups started raising awareness amongst people, regarding obtaining reparations from Union Carbide. 

In due course of time, in 2001, Union Carbide (UCC) was taken over by DOW Chemicals. Owing to the pressure created by the NGOs it was decided that the responsibility for the reparations shall be also handed over to DOW Chemicals. According to a webpage of DOW, it has denied inheriting any responsibility for the disaster, both from UCIL and UCC.  

I, especially and perhaps fondly, recall an incident where a First Tier Institute of India, sought sponsorship from DOW Chemicals for an academic conference. This information somehow caught the attention of the student organization named “Students for Bhopal” (currently https://www.bhopal.net). The volunteers of this organization approached the convener of the conference, who rebuked them regarding objecting to a matter which was not their concern. Consequently, the volunteers approached the students’ body of the institute, and following the pressure from the students, the sponsorship offer from DOW Chemicals was turned down. 

I have used the above incident to building a context. 

Pretty recently, a Chemical company sent tankers carrying Sodium Hydrosulphide (NaHS) to Surat, and dumped the waste illegally thus causing deaths of people (https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/6-die-of-toxic-gas-from-tanker-dumping-chemical-waste-7710482/, https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/surat/surat-sangam-enviro-charges-discharging-hazardous-waste-sachin-creek-7734511/). This caused the case to be noted by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), and the necessary documents on the website of NGT can be found and downloaded from the internet (Here: https://greentribunal.gov.in/sites/default/files/news_updates/AFFIDAVIT%20BY%20MPCB%20IN%20MA%20NO.%2046%20of%202022%20IN%20OA%20NO.%2005%20of%202022%20(NEWS%20ITEM%20PUBLISHED%20IN%20THE%20INDIAN%20EXPRESS%20DATED%2007.01.2022%20TITLED%20GUJARAT%20AT%20LEAST%2006%20DEAD,%2020%20SICK%20AFTER%20GAS%20LEAK%20AT%20INDUSTRIAL%20AREA%20IN%20SURAT).pdf) 

Now, can such a company wash its hands off? Should academic institutions take the responsibility for washing off such careless deeds. The news is that such events have happened. Inspite of the Engineer’s ethical responsibility towards the society and the environment, a Memorandum of Understanding was indeed signed between the Chemical company dumping toxic waste, and an academic institution. This incident throws light on how morally weak certain so-called academic leaders are. This also flashes back on the memories of the irresponsible acts of people which followed up the incident on the black nights of December 2 and 3 at Bhopal. 

#responsibility #environment #society #engineer #engineering #graduate #attributes #responsibility #bhopal #bhopaltragedy 

The Absurdity of HR in Academia: Bureaucratic Parasites and the Decline of Academic Freedom

 Educational institutions are meant to foster learning, creativity, and independent thought. But today, a growing infestation of bureaucratic practices, spearheaded by overzealous HR departments, is strangling these ideals. While the original intent of HR was to manage logistics and support faculty, they now exert control far beyond their expertise, creating rigid hierarchies, fostering dissatisfaction, and demotivating educators. The controversy at a private university in India serves as a glaring example of how this trend is damaging academic freedom and undermining institutional integrity.

HR's Overreach: Power Without Purpose

The role of HR in education has morphed from support into control. HR managers have begun meddling in faculty recruitment, pay structures, promotions, and disciplinary actions, even though they lack the academic credentials to understand teaching and research intricacies. Many HR teams insist on recruiting younger, cheaper faculty, leaving experienced scholars sidelined. This retail-like approach to education diminishes the value of institutional knowledge, as younger faculty are treated like disposable resources, expected to follow orders rather than contribute meaningfully.

Meanwhile, HR departments lobby for better pay for themselves, creating toxic work environments where administrative staff enjoy benefits at the expense of educators. Faculty members often find themselves trapped between stagnant salaries and arbitrary rules, disillusioned by the very institutions meant to uplift them.

A Private University’s Crisis: Bureaucratic Overreach in Action

Recently, one of India’s prominent private universities became a case study in how excessive bureaucracy destroys academic freedom. The university faced backlash after a senior faculty member’s research touched on politically sensitive issues, leading to his abrupt resignation. Another faculty member, outraged by the administration’s lack of support, resigned in protest. The university's handling of the situation exposed a culture of fear, where administrators, desperate to avoid controversy, sacrificed academic freedom for institutional reputation.

Faculty members warned that such interference could trigger an exodus, pointing to a deeper problem: universities now treat educators as liabilities rather than assets. The institution's obsession with public perception and bureaucratic compliance reflects a growing trend—where HR practices stifle innovation and disrupt the free exchange of ideas, transforming universities into rigid, risk-averse entities.

HR: A Parasite in the Educational System

HR departments in academia act like parasites, consuming resources while offering little in return. These departments have no expertise in pedagogy or research, yet they influence academic policies, dictate workloads, and block pay raises. Their primary focus is compliance, not education. Metrics and processes take precedence over research, while faculty are judged by arbitrary standards rather than meaningful contributions.

This environment drives experienced faculty out of the system, leaving younger, less-prepared educators to fill the gaps. Research, which relies heavily on the guidance and expertise of senior faculty, suffers in the process. With educators demoralized and disengaged, institutions struggle to maintain academic rigor and innovation.

A Vicious Cycle of Attrition

India’s accreditation body, the NAAC, tracks faculty attrition rates as an indicator of institutional health. Unfortunately, many universities have alarmingly high attrition, driven by poor pay, coercive administration, and HR interference. HR managers often negotiate salaries like market deals, prioritizing their own benefits while undermining faculty compensation.

This toxic environment perpetuates dissatisfaction, with faculty members leaving in search of better opportunities. As institutions lose their most talented educators, they face a decline in academic standards, triggering further attrition. The bureaucratic machinery continues to grind forward, oblivious to the damage it causes.

Bureaucratization: A Crisis in Education

The increasing bureaucratization of education reduces universities to soulless organizations focused on compliance rather than creativity. Faculty autonomy, once a cornerstone of academic institutions, is under threat from administrative overreach. Decisions about research, teaching methods, and academic programs are often dictated by administrators with no academic background, further alienating educators.

When education is reduced to a set of rules and procedures, the joy of learning disappears. Universities become mere credential factories, producing graduates without the skills or mindset to contribute meaningfully to society. The goal of education should be to nurture citizens capable of independent thought, not to create cogs in a bureaucratic machine.

Conclusion: Reclaiming Education from HR

It is time to challenge the stranglehold of HR departments in academic institutions. Faculty governance must be restored, with educators given control over academic policies and decisions. HR should return to its original role—providing administrative support—rather than acting as a gatekeeper of salaries and promotions.

The private university crisis serves as a wake-up call for all institutions. If universities continue to prioritize bureaucratic control over academic freedom, they risk alienating the very people who drive research and innovation. Educational institutions should exist to foster learning, not to serve the whims of HR managers and administrators.

We must ask ourselves: Are our universities nurturing minds or stifling them? The answer will determine the future of education in India. It is imperative that we reclaim academia from the clutches of bureaucracy before it’s too late.

The Impact of HR Policies on Faculty Attrition and Its Implications for Educational Institutions

Introduction:

Faculty attrition is a growing concern for educational institutions across the country, affecting not only the quality of education but also the reputation and effectiveness of universities and colleges. The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), an accreditation body in India, has taken note of this alarming trend, emphasizing that high rates of faculty turnover can significantly impact an institution's accreditation status.

But why are so many qualified, skilled, and experienced educators leaving their positions? The answer often lies in the administrative and HR practices within these institutions. Factors such as pay packages that do not align with qualifications, coercive administrative tactics, and bargaining behaviours by HR managers play a substantial role in pushing faculty members away. This blog will delve into these issues, shedding light on the root causes of faculty attrition and offering recommendations for creating a more conducive and supportive work environment.

The Misalignment of Pay Packages with Qualifications and Skills

One of the primary reasons for faculty attrition is the need for a fair and competitive compensation structure. Pay packages often do not reflect the qualifications, experience, skills, and knowledge that educators bring to the table. This mismatch can demotivate faculty members, leading to dissatisfaction and, ultimately, resignation.

1. Inadequate Salary Structure: In many institutions, faculty salaries are often frozen at a certain level, regardless of the faculty member's achievements, research contributions, or years of experience. This rigidity not only discourages faculty members from excelling but also makes it difficult for institutions to retain top talent, as other organizations offer better compensation.

2. Failure to Recognize Skills and Knowledge: Educational institutions often fail to recognize the diverse skill sets and knowledge that faculty members bring. This lack of acknowledgement manifests in pay packages that do not reflect an individual’s contributions, leading to feelings of being undervalued.

3. Comparison with Industry Standards: When compared to their counterparts in the corporate world or even in other academic institutions, many educators find that their pay packages are far less competitive. This realization often leads to frustration, prompting them to seek opportunities elsewhere where their qualifications and expertise are better valued.

Coercive Tactics in Administration and HR

Administrative and HR practices play a crucial role in shaping the work environment within educational institutions. Unfortunately, in many cases, coercive tactics by these departments contribute to a hostile and demoralizing atmosphere.

1. Micromanagement and Excessive Monitoring: HR departments often impose stringent policies and rules that lead to a micromanaged work environment. Faculty members are frequently required to report minute details of their work, which creates an atmosphere of distrust and stifles creativity and autonomy.

2. Threats and Intimidation: Another distressing trend is the use of threats and intimidation by HR personnel to control faculty behaviour. For instance, threatening to withhold promotions, increments, or even contractual renewals if certain expectations are not met is a common tactic. Such behaviour creates a sense of fear and insecurity, which can significantly impact faculty morale.

3. Lack of Respect for Faculty Autonomy: Faculty members are professionals with years of training and expertise in their fields. However, coercive HR tactics often strip them of their autonomy, treating them as mere employees rather than as valued members of the academic community. This disregard for faculty autonomy can be incredibly demoralizing, leading to high attrition rates.

HR Managers Threatening and Bargaining Over Salary Increases

One of the most damaging aspects of HR practices in educational institutions is the tendency of HR managers to engage in bargaining and threatening tactics when it comes to salary negotiations.

1. Bargaining Rather than Negotiating: In a fair work environment, salary negotiations should be a process where both parties come to a mutually beneficial agreement. However, many HR managers adopt a bargaining approach, where they attempt to minimize salary increments by downplaying faculty qualifications, achievements, or contributions. This behaviour creates a sense of disrespect and devalues the efforts of faculty members.

2. Threats of Termination or Contract Non-Renewal: In some cases, HR managers resort to threatening faculty members with termination or contract non-renewal if they demand salary adjustments that align with their qualifications and experience. Such tactics not only create a toxic work environment but also lead to the loss of talented educators who could have made significant contributions to the institution.

3. Lack of Transparency: The lack of transparency in salary negotiations is another factor that contributes to faculty attrition. When faculty members feel that salary decisions are arbitrary or based on favoritism, they lose trust in the institution, leading to higher turnover rates.

The Impact of Faculty Attrition on Educational Institutions

High faculty attrition rates have far-reaching consequences for educational institutions, affecting various aspects of their operations and reputation.

1. Loss of Institutional Knowledge: When experienced faculty members leave, they take with them years of institutional knowledge, research experience, and pedagogical expertise. This loss can be detrimental to the quality of education, research initiatives, and mentorship programs within the institution.

2. Decline in Research Output: Faculty attrition often leads to a decline in research productivity, as experienced educators who drive research initiatives are no longer available to guide projects or mentor junior colleagues. This decline can affect the institution's reputation, making it less attractive to prospective students and funding bodies.

3. Impact on Accreditation: The NAAC and other accreditation bodies place significant emphasis on faculty stability and quality. High attrition rates can lead to negative evaluations, affecting the institution's accreditation status and, in turn, its ability to attract students, funding, and partnerships.

4. Decreased Morale Among Remaining Faculty: The departure of colleagues can have a profound impact on the morale of remaining faculty members. When talented educators leave due to coercive HR tactics or inadequate pay, it sends a message that the institution does not value its employees, leading to decreased motivation and engagement among those who stay.

Recommendations for Addressing Faculty Attrition

To address the issue of faculty attrition, educational institutions must take a proactive approach to create a more supportive, fair, and transparent work environment. Here are some recommendations:

1. Implement Fair Compensation Structures: Institutions should regularly review and update their salary structures to ensure that they are competitive and reflective of faculty qualifications, skills, and experience. Pay packages should be transparent, with clear guidelines for increments and promotions.

2. Foster a Positive Work Environment: HR departments should focus on creating a positive work environment that respects faculty autonomy, encourages creativity, and promotes collaboration. This includes minimizing micromanagement, reducing administrative burdens, and offering opportunities for professional growth.

3. Adopt Transparent HR Practices: Transparency in decision-making, particularly regarding salary negotiations, promotions, and contract renewals, is essential for building trust between faculty members and the administration. Clear communication and consistency in policies can help reduce misunderstandings and foster a sense of fairness.

4. Provide Opportunities for Professional Development: Institutions should invest in the professional development of their faculty members, offering opportunities for training, research, and skill enhancement. This not only helps faculty members grow but also demonstrates the institution's commitment to their long-term success.

5. Create a Collaborative HR-Faculty Relationship: Rather than adopting an adversarial approach, HR departments should work collaboratively with faculty members to address concerns, negotiate salaries, and develop policies that benefit both parties. This partnership approach can help build a sense of community and mutual respect.

Conclusion

Faculty attrition is a pressing issue that has significant implications for the quality and effectiveness of educational institutions. By addressing the root causes of attrition, such as non-commensurate pay packages, coercive administrative tactics, and threatening HR practices, institutions can create a more supportive, fair, and empowering work environment for their educators.

Ultimately, the success of an educational institution depends on the dedication, expertise, and stability of its faculty members. By valuing their contributions and ensuring that HR practices align with principles of fairness, respect, and transparency, institutions can retain talented educators, enhance their reputation, and provide high-quality education to future generations.

#FacultyAttrition #HigherEducation #HRPractices #AcademicFreedom #FacultyRetention #NAAC #UniversityPolicies 

The Detrimental Impact of Short-Sighted HR Policies on Research and Innovation in Education

Introduction:

In recent years, a troubling trend has emerged within the education sector – the increasing influence of HR managers who seem to prioritize cost-cutting over nurturing academic excellence. This shift towards treating educational institutions like retail stores has led to a preference for hiring younger faculty members at lower salaries, while experienced and seasoned educators are sidelined or undervalued. This phenomenon is not only undermining the dignity of teaching as a profession but also jeopardizing the research, innovation, and quality of education that institutions are meant to uphold.

The Rise of Corporate Culture in Academia:

The influence of corporate culture within universities is a relatively new development. Originally, educational institutions operated on values that prioritized knowledge dissemination, research, mentorship, and the creation of a nurturing environment for students and faculty alike. However, with the introduction of HR practices that mimic the corporate world, a shift has occurred, leading to the rise of policies that view faculty members as mere employees rather than torchbearers of knowledge and innovation.

This shift manifests in the recruitment of younger faculty members at lower salaries, often justified by the idea of being "cost-effective." However, this approach disregards the irreplaceable value that experienced educators bring to the table. Instead of nurturing a balanced environment where the wisdom of seasoned professionals complements the fresh perspectives of younger faculty, HR practices are now inclined to favor those who are less expensive, regardless of the impact on the institution's overall quality.

The Retail Store Mentality – Bowing to Authority:

In the retail industry, younger employees are often hired because they are more willing to follow instructions without question and can be paid less. Unfortunately, this mentality has seeped into the education sector, where HR managers seem to prefer faculty members who will "bow down" to authority without challenging outdated norms or advocating for academic freedom. This dynamic not only limits the autonomy of younger educators but also fosters an environment where critical thinking and innovation are stifled.

By hiring less experienced faculty who are willing to accept lower wages, HR managers are inadvertently creating a hierarchical structure that undermines the democratic and egalitarian nature of academia. This approach disregards the fact that teaching and research thrive in an environment that encourages questioning, debate, and the free exchange of ideas – qualities that are often nurtured by experienced educators.

The Value of Senior Faculty Members:

Senior faculty members are the backbone of any academic institution. They bring decades of experience, a wealth of knowledge, and a deep understanding of their respective fields. Their contributions extend beyond teaching; they are often the driving force behind research initiatives, guiding younger colleagues, mentoring students, and developing innovative projects that advance both the institution and the broader field of study.

However, when HR practices prioritize cost-saving over retaining experienced educators, universities lose more than just employees – they lose mentors, thought leaders, and innovators. Research and innovation, which are typically spearheaded by senior faculty members, suffer as a result. The quality of publications, research projects, and the overall intellectual environment of the institution declines, ultimately impacting its reputation and the quality of education delivered to students.

The Impact on Research and Innovation:

Research and innovation are critical components of a thriving academic ecosystem. Universities are not just places where knowledge is transferred; they are centers of inquiry, exploration, and discovery. When experienced educators are sidelined, the very essence of what makes these institutions unique is at risk.

Senior faculty members often lead research projects that attract funding, foster interdisciplinary collaborations, and generate groundbreaking insights. Their experience allows them to identify gaps in existing knowledge, ask the right questions, and mentor the next generation of researchers. By pushing them aside in favor of cheaper, less experienced faculty, universities compromise their ability to contribute to society through research, knowledge dissemination, and thought leadership.

Moreover, without the guidance of experienced mentors, younger faculty members may struggle to navigate the complexities of research, grant writing, and publication. This lack of mentorship can lead to a decline in the quality and quantity of research output, further diminishing the institution's standing in the academic community.

The False Economy of Cost-Cutting:

The irony of this situation is that while HR managers may believe they are saving money by hiring younger, less experienced faculty, the long-term costs of such a strategy can be devastating. Institutions that prioritize short-term financial gains over academic excellence risk losing their credibility, their ability to attract top talent, and their relevance in an increasingly competitive educational landscape.

Experienced faculty members bring more than just knowledge; they attract students, funding, partnerships, and collaborations. Their presence can significantly enhance the institution's reputation, making it a more attractive option for prospective students, researchers, and investors. When these faculty members are undervalued or pushed out, universities risk losing these opportunities, ultimately compromising their long-term financial sustainability.

The Importance of Faculty Autonomy and Academic Freedom:

One of the cornerstones of a thriving academic environment is faculty autonomy and academic freedom. When HR managers prioritize control and obedience over intellectual independence, they create an environment where innovation is stifled, and creativity is suppressed. Faculty members should have the freedom to explore new ideas, challenge existing paradigms, and contribute to the evolution of their respective fields without fear of retribution or micromanagement.

The retail-store approach to managing faculty is in direct conflict with these principles. It reduces educators to mere employees, stripping them of their autonomy and reducing their ability to contribute meaningfully to the academic community. This not only harms individual faculty members but also undermines the very purpose of higher education – to foster an environment of learning, growth, and discovery.

The Need for a Balanced Approach:

To address this issue, educational institutions must adopt a balanced approach that recognizes the value of both experienced and younger faculty members. HR practices should be designed to create an environment where experienced educators are valued for their expertise, while younger faculty members are provided with opportunities to learn, grow, and develop their skills.

By fostering a culture of mentorship, collaboration, and mutual respect, universities can create an environment where research, innovation, and teaching excellence can flourish. This approach not only benefits the institution but also ensures that students receive a well-rounded education that prepares them for the challenges of the future.

Recommendations for Educational Institutions:

1. Rethink Recruitment Policies: Universities should prioritize recruiting faculty members based on their qualifications, experience, and potential contributions to research and innovation. Cost should not be the primary factor in hiring decisions.

2. Promote Faculty Development: Invest in professional development programs that encourage continuous learning and growth for both experienced and younger faculty members. This ensures that all educators can contribute effectively to the institution's mission.

3. Encourage Collaboration: Create opportunities for experienced faculty to mentor younger colleagues, fostering an environment of collaboration and knowledge-sharing. This will help build a strong, cohesive academic community.

4. Value Research and Innovation: Recognize and reward faculty members who contribute to research, innovation, and the overall advancement of the institution. This includes providing adequate funding, resources, and support for research initiatives.

5. Protect Academic Freedom: Establish policies that protect faculty autonomy and academic freedom, ensuring that educators can explore new ideas, challenge existing norms, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge without fear of retribution.

Conclusion:

The impact of short-sighted HR policies on research and innovation in education is a pressing issue that requires urgent attention. By treating educational institutions like retail stores and prioritizing cost-cutting over academic excellence, we risk losing the very qualities that make these institutions valuable – knowledge, creativity, and the pursuit of truth.

It's time for universities to recognize the irreplaceable value of experienced educators and to create an environment where faculty members of all ages are respected, valued, and empowered. Only then can we ensure that our educational institutions remain centers of learning, research, and innovation that contribute meaningfully to society.

The Impact of HR Managers on India's Educational Ecosystem: A Growing Concern

Introduction

In recent years, the human resource (HR) ecosystem within Indian educational institutions has come under scrutiny. While HR professionals play a crucial role in fostering workplace harmony and managing talent, the evolving dynamics in universities and colleges have raised questions about their influence on the effective delivery of education. More specifically, the actions and policies of HR managers have become a subject of satire, critique, and concern among educators and stakeholders.

This article will deal with the growing discourse around HR managers in the educational ecosystem, examining how their actions can hinder the mission of universities to produce responsible citizens and enlightened professionals.

The Meme Culture and HR Ecosystem

One of the most telling indicators of the sentiments toward HR managers in India is the barrage of memes, videos, and reels on social media platforms like Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. These short, humorous, and sometimes biting portrayals highlight many professionals' frustration toward the HR ecosystem. The content often depicts HR managers as rigid, bureaucratic, and sometimes insensitive to the needs of employees. While the intent is humorous, the underlying message reflects deeper issues at play.

HR in Educational Institutions: The Growing Discontent

Unlike corporate organizations where HR departments are well-established, the presence of HR managers in universities is a relatively newer phenomenon. Traditionally, educational institutions were managed by academicians and administrative staff who understood the nuances of pedagogy, student needs, and faculty requirements. The influx of HR managers into this ecosystem, however, has introduced a new set of challenges:

1. Bizarre Rules and Regulations: Many educational institutions have reported instances of HR managers imposing rules that seem arbitrary or disconnected from the realities of academia. From mandating stringent attendance policies to implementing rigid dress codes, these regulations often clash with the freedoms that educators have historically enjoyed. In extreme cases, some of these rules even contravene the provisions of the Indian Constitution, infringing upon the rights and freedoms of staff members.

2. Recruitment Challenges: A major concern is the recruitment practices that have emerged under HR's purview. In many instances, HR managers prioritize candidates based on factors that may not align with the institution's educational mission. As a result, staff members who lack pedagogical skills or academic qualifications find their way into teaching positions. This undermines the quality of education and affects the institution's ability to fulfill its primary goal: nurturing young minds.

3. A Culture of Punishment: One of the most contentious aspects of the HR ecosystem in educational institutions is the tendency to create a punitive work environment. Instances of casual leave deductions, leave without pay for minor infractions, or penalizing staff members for being a minute late have been reported. Such practices foster a culture of fear and anxiety, which is antithetical to the nurturing, open environment that educational institutions should embody.

The Impact on Academic Delivery and Morale

The interference of HR managers in academic matters has a direct impact on the quality of education. When educators feel micromanaged, undervalued, or punished for minor infractions, their motivation to deliver high-quality teaching diminishes. A stressed or dissatisfied educator is less likely to engage students, innovate in the classroom, or invest time in mentoring.

Moreover, the culture of punishment and rigid enforcement trickles down to the students. When teachers operate in an environment of fear and control, they inadvertently pass on these stressors to their students, affecting the overall learning experience. Educational institutions are meant to be spaces of curiosity, creativity, and exploration, not places where fear and rigidity prevail.

HR Managers vs. Academic Freedom

At the heart of the issue is the clash between HR managers' desire to enforce policies and the academic community's need for autonomy. Universities and colleges have always thrived on the principle of academic freedom, where educators have the liberty to explore, innovate, and challenge norms. However, the growing influence of HR managers threatens this freedom.

1. Stifling Innovation: When educators feel constrained by bureaucratic red tape, they are less likely to experiment with new teaching methods, research ideas, or collaborative projects. This stifles innovation and limits the institution's ability to adapt to changing educational landscapes.

2. Undermining Professional Judgment: HR managers, who may lack an understanding of academic processes, often undermine the professional judgment of faculty members. Decisions about course content, teaching methodologies, and student evaluations should ideally be left to those with subject matter expertise. However, HR interference can lead to decisions that prioritize policy over pedagogy.

The Role of Universities in Building Citizens

Indian universities have a broader mission than merely imparting knowledge; they are tasked with shaping the citizens of tomorrow. This involves fostering values like empathy, critical thinking, and social responsibility. However, when the HR ecosystem creates an environment that is adversarial or punitive, it contradicts this mission. How can we expect students to develop into compassionate and responsible citizens when they witness their educators being subjected to unnecessary rules, penalties, and micromanagement?

The Way Forward: Building a Harmonious Ecosystem

It's not all doom and gloom. HR managers can play a positive role in educational institutions if they understand and respect the unique dynamics of academia. Here are a few suggestions for creating a more harmonious relationship between HR and academic staff:

1. Collaboration Over Control: HR managers should see themselves as partners in the academic mission, working collaboratively with faculty members to create a positive work environment. Instead of imposing rules, they should seek input from educators and involve them in policy-making processes.

2. Focus on Pedagogical Skills: Recruitment practices should prioritize candidates with strong pedagogical skills and a genuine passion for teaching. HR managers should work closely with academic leaders to ensure that new hires align with the institution's mission and values.

3. Promoting Well-being: Instead of enforcing punitive measures, HR managers should focus on the well-being and professional development of educators. Providing opportunities for skill enhancement, mental health support, and work-life balance can significantly improve morale and productivity.

4. Understanding Academic Freedom: HR managers must recognize the importance of academic freedom and avoid interfering with pedagogical decisions. Policies should be flexible enough to accommodate the diverse needs of educators and students.

Conclusion

The HR ecosystem in India's educational institutions is at a crossroads. While HR managers have the potential to contribute positively to the functioning of universities, their current approach often hinders the effective delivery of education. By fostering a culture of collaboration, understanding, and respect for academic freedom, HR managers can become valuable allies in the mission to create a more enlightened and empowered generation of students. After all, the ultimate goal of any educational institution is to build responsible, thoughtful, and capable citizens who will shape the future of our nation.

The Quality Assurance and Quality Control of PhD theses/dissertations

A few years ago #UGC came up with a regulation of having #mandatory journal publications for #PhD scholars. Most likely the intention of #UGC was to encourage the relevance of the research work done through the process of thorough peer-review and quality check. Consequently, the ordinances of PhD for several public (and perhaps private) Universities were modified to account for this requirement. 

However, people found several #loopholes in this #regulation. The positive intention of #UGC  resulted in the rise of several #predatory j#ournals. It turned out that in these journals the papers were indeed #open #access, but without the customary and thorough peer-review. Interestingly, new terminologies of #paid and #unpaid journals were noted in #academia. 

Eventually, this turned into an industry, until pretty recently there was a list of several journals which were taken off the UGC care list.  It was found out (also by me), through thorough SCOPUS and Web-of-Science based investigation there several predatory publishers used the ISSN numbers of no-more-existent journals to cut a video demonstrating their existence in the SCOPUS list.  

Recent reports suggest that the requirement of #publication of research papers would be removed in the near future. Several academicians of top-ranking institutes are rueing this decision. 

It is really a dilemma, but is there an ethical solution to this issue? 

The UGC might consider developing a panel of "well-qualified" researchers e.g. from IITs, IISc, IISER, NITs and other institutes desiring involvement, for peer-reviewing the research work. Every student who would be working for the research degree will have the opportunity to visit an institution, where he / she may present the work, and look for evaluation and if possible upgradation. 

This process of peer review may be divided into three (or even more) different categories - scientific validity, statistical validity and technical validity. I am suggesting a feature like ArXIV where a researcher may upload the work, and get it peer-reviewed and commented on. 

This process will surely require an honor code, since this process is not fool-proof against possible misuse. Let us assume that 95% of the people would be fair, and safeguards shall be required for the protection of the Intellectual Property Rights. 

I hope this madness against blaming the system for everything stops and constructive processes begin regarding the evaluation and value addition of the work starts. 

#research #publications #people #quality #like #opportunity #work #science #video #qualityassurance #intellectualproperty #universities #future