We’re all excellent now

Recently, the scientist and Substacker Ruxandra Teslo published two superb essays on the decline of the ‘Weird Nerd’ in academia. Weird Nerds are brilliant and devoted to science, yet lack social skills. As Teslo notes, many are neurodiverse. But in academia, Weird Nerds may have become rarer. Building on Nate Silver’s observation that tech firms and hedge funds increasingly poach ‘weird smart misfits’, Teslo argues that ‘Failed Corporatists’ are supplanting Weird Nerds,

‘[The Failed Corporatist] is someone who stumbles upon academia not so much out of a love for The Truth, as due to an inability to thrive in corporate settings for various other, unrelated reasons… This skill set enables them to ascend the ranks of academic administration, often gaining significant influence and control over The Weird Nerd. Confronted with this altered habitat, The Nerd often finds itself in a state of distress and confusion. Its intrinsic motivation clashes with the newly imposed corporate-like order and the demand for conformity, leading to frantic efforts to assert its natural tendencies. Unfortunately, these efforts are often met with resistance or outright rejection, not only from The Failed Corporatist but also from the broader world that the academic reserve is a part of. All in all, I think this disturbance means the remaining Nerds are further driven away.’

Parts of this argument are questionable – I am not sure that most academics who favour administrative tasks failed in the corporate sector – but the key point is crucial; traditional academic personalities seem to be undergoing marginalization.

As Teslo asserts, such changes may entail a decline in the brilliance of academic output. Weird Nerds have several disadvantages – Teslo notes the difficult personalities of many – yet their outstanding intellectual skills compensate. Many of the most famous scientists and intellectuals have been Weird Nerds.

Beyond such changes, there have been wider pressures on individual brilliance. Increasingly, fields are structured in ways that encourage group-based working, rather than individual breakthroughs; this reflects factors such as technological sophistication, field maturity (which diminishes the potential of individual initiative) and the replication crisis (which reduces the credibility of single studies).

Concurrently, an odd phenomenon has emerged. Like never before, universities emphasize excellence. This has institutional manifestations; no university website would be complete without mention of excellence and auditing exercises like the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) even include the word in their name. This has individual manifestations; appraisal and promotion processes make heavy reference to the concept.

This is paradoxical. Excellence appears scarcer and less important than ever, yet universities are making unprecedented reference to it. As many have observed, managerial conceptions of excellence are problematic and (arguably) diluted. Universities tend to extend the basis of excellence and assert that, in some way and at some time, all can be excellent. This stretches the concept to breaking point, yet mirrors academia’s odd relationship with hierarchies. As I have argued, contemporary academia dislikes hierarchies, beyond those which are strictly necessary and functional.

What explains this paradox? To some extent, this reflects demand from regular academics. People like to think they are performing effectively and, faced with the decline of traditional excellence, such discourse may assuage insecurities. Putting it bluntly, some have inflated opinions of themselves. In one of her essays, Teslo notes anger towards Katalin Karikó, the biochemist whose contributions to mRNA technology won her a Nobel Prize and who recently complained about people pleasing and bureaucracy in universities. Responding to this, some argued that academia is full of geniuses and Karikó should not be exempt from these pressures. Such claims are optimistic.

Demographic changes are relevant. Higher education has become a mass industry and, as non-traditional groups have entered academia, there is need for inclusive performance metrics. The sector is more feminized. Research indicates that females place less stress on individual achievement, emphasizing collective attainment and, in academia, alternative goals such as social justice and emotional well-being. Recently, certain institutions have promoted ‘inclusive excellence’.

Of course, universities collude in this. As organizational theorists have long recognized, organizations create myths to justify their continuing operations and seek legitimacy. Returning to Teslo, we may see the hand of the Failed Corporatist. As they have become more like corporations, universities have become better at marketing.

And such changes meet the needs of the Failed Corporatist. Beyond self-promotion, expanding definitions of excellence erode historic barriers to entry to the sector, i.e. the need to be a traditionally brilliant academic. In other areas, there are similar trends. For example, co-authorship has become almost as valued as single authorship and promotion metrics increasingly feature non-research activities. Like expanding definitions of excellence, these changes smooth the path of the Failed Corporatist.

Such phenomena reinforce each other. As definitions of excellence expand, Failed Corporatists become more entrenched and Weird Nerds are further marginalized. These trends have even intensified. Controversially, the next UK REF will emphasize collegiality and environment, downgrading individual contributions. The old academia is not coming back.

Perhaps unmitigated regret is unwise. As Teslo observes, traditional academia could be toxic. Weird Nerds can engage in destructive behaviour, reflecting their difficult characters; everyone who has spent extended time in academia will have stories about such personalities.

The new academia has several achievements. It has made the sector more professional, reduced discriminatory behaviour and engaged broader demographics.

But is it still academia?

---

If you enjoyed reading this, do think about subscribing! Subscription is free – all it means is that you’ll receive a weekly email. But every new subscriber makes me very happy 😊 😊 😊