Doing your best, and yet feeling like failing -- let's talk more about challenges for academics be(com)ing parents

(c) Evangeline Gallagher/Guardian.

(c) Evangeline Gallagher/Guardian.

I have recently had a few exchanges with younger academic colleagues that have become parents. Given my own experience during the just over three years since I became a dad, I was not surprised (but still deeply saddened) to hear them express frustration at the lack of time to engage with research and intellectual stimulation in the way they wanted, and a consequent certain loss of their identity and sometimes sense of self-worth, and fears and worries about the impact that juggling new childcare responsibilities (which everyone found to be extremely fulfilling and rewarding, though) will have on careers and reputations, or even job stability.

What did surprise me, however, is that most colleagues felt that the situation was made worse because nobody talks about it, which fuels feelings of isolation and imposter syndrome (which I very much experience myself too), or can even push some to try to hide or certainly not volunteer the fact of their imminent or recent parenthood. So this post just tries to start a conversation and to say to each and every one of my academic colleagues facing a similar struggle, that I see you and I am always happy to talk about it. Please do reach out if you feel like it.

I am, of course, consciously aware of my privileged position as a middle-class, white, male professor, but I am also acutely aware of the fact that I got to this stage in my career before becoming a parent and I am also entirely convinced that I would not have progressed so quickly in academia if I had been a parent at a younger age. As a result of this, in my mind, I hold very complicated and contradictory thoughts and feelings: I have no reason to complain or to expect things to be any better, but I also do not deserve my position because it is one reflective of the merits and contribution of an Albert that no longer exists (the one always available, willing to overwork, to travel, the one that ‘was everywhere’ and was the first one to react to developments in my field). I feel bad that I cannot make the same sort of contribution I used to. And that is because I left it (and the reputation, prestige, or simply ego resulting from it) define me. I am no longer that person, so who am I and how can I still occupy the same space or have the same aspirations as the Albert that no longer is?

I am very happy that I took extended periods of shared parental leave to bond with and take care of my kids when they were babies, but I also struggled a fair bit during those periods of absence from academia. Especially during my second shared parental leave because I took it 'solo' (my partner went back to work) and I found myself craving some 'adult' / 'intellectual' conversation regularly. This led me to accept invitations to participate in training programmes and webinars during my period of leave, as I thought that would make the feeling subside. But, to the contrary, after each event I was left exhausted and feeling that I had both failed as an academic (my performances were well below what I would have liked due to sleep deprivation, mental rustiness and the unavoidable distractions of ‘zooming with a baby on your arms’) and, worse, that I had neglected my child and robbed her of some precious quality time.

And this has not stopped. To be 100% honest, I keep struggling with my new identity of parent academic (and increased imposter syndrome that comes with the need to say no even more than before, with the prioritisation of parent over academic) after having returned from the second leave a few months ago. I still have serious difficulty facing (and are yet to accept) the prospects of a more constrained academic life that really needs to be balanced with (a lovely) family. And this is not helped by the fact that I had set the bar so high for myself (both in my head and regarding institutional expectations), that I cannot but keep failing in my futile attempts at trying to clear it. I am honestly doing my best, and yet, every day, I feel I am failing.

When I can take a step back from those feelings (and it is hard not to swim, or even indulge in them), I can see that most of these feelings are probably in common with everyone else that becomes a parent and therefore sees their lives decentered (or recentered), but I think that perhaps this is particularly challenging for academics given ‘the way the system now works’ and the underappreciated role of self-confidence and self-believe in enabling us to perform our jobs at the level of ‘continuous and ever-increasing excellence’ expected from us.

I also think that the challenges are particularly acute for academics becoming parents because it is a major shock that probably puts a mirror in front of (most of) us that reflects how unsustainable and unbalanced our work/research/life was, although of course the challenges remain for academics being parents (at least for a good few years, I hear from most colleagues further advanced in their parenthoods).

And I also think this is probably only getting worse given the perverse dynamics of permanent assessment and benchmarking of our performance, as well as a de facto ‘up or out’ system where you are seen to fail unless you go from promotion to promotion in short periods of time — because, in the end, the social status of the profession has been degraded so significantly that there is a worrying perception that *just* having a permanent entry-level academic job (Assistant Professor or Lecturer, depending on the system) does not really recognise you as a weighty expert in your field (which it does, in my opinion).

So, here it is. At least I have emptied my brain. And I hope someone, somewhere will find some value in the reflection. And perhaps a conversation will start. I am here, and I am listening.

A tidal wave for (UK) universities IT procurement? -- Some thoughts on post COVID-19 challenges

http___cdn.cnn.com_cnnnext_dam_assets_181101171305-katsushika-hokusai-1.jpg

All around the world, university campuses have been closed and will remain closed for a while, then reopen and likely close again, then reopen (and repeat for a few iterations), as we transition to a ‘new normal’. The current lockdown and the likelihood of continued social distancing measures for the foreseeable future are putting a lot of pressure on the higher education sector to adapt to ‘online delivery’ in no time and with no proper planning.

This is a massive (almost impossible) task and will require massive investment, whatever dire financial straits higher education institutions have to navigate as a result of the imminent (or current?) economic crisis and Governments’ funding decisions. Without such investment, the sector will not be able to adapt—except in the very few countries where some of these investment were already made. And that investment will have to be channelled through proper (and largely rethought) procurement strategies and processes, which I think require some attention in the very near future.

But, ‘online teaching’ is happening with (almost no) additional investment …

Not really. The fact that the immediate transition into (some sort of) online delivery (of teaching and, in a larger magnitude, meetings) has not (yet) required such massive investment in the higher education context is just a matter of luck. In particular in the case of the UK, with which I am most familiar (and which is likely to be rather similar to most in other developed countries), universities have a completely inadequate IT infrastructure to support working from home and online teaching and research. The situation can only be worse elsewhere. However, the shortcomings of the IT infrastructure are largely hidden behind the private investment in IT infrastructure by the (UK) higher education workforce.

More generally, the entire transition to the online environment is currently unsustainably relying on individual resources and creativity. I half-joked about the challenges of working from home on twitter, but the serious fact is that large proportions of the academic and professional services communities do not have an adequate work space at home or, for that matter, adequate IT equipment. Issues of space and office furniture may well be nigh impossible to fix (except, perhaps, better chairs), but an improvement on the current IT shortcomings will certainly be necessary sooner rather than later.

Right now, I am writing this blog post on my personal computer—from which I have also been lecturing, attending endless meetings and completing some research tasks (to the limited extent my current circumstances allow). My university (desktop) computer is gathering dust in my office. My laptop was bought a few years ago and is giving worrying signs of likely malfunctioning (please, remember to back up your hard disk!). I have no certainty that I will remain able to do my job if my laptop goes. Moreover, my laptop is struggling with the increased demands of advanced videoconferencing software and the larger amounts of information to be uploaded and downloaded from the cloud. It was simply never intended for this intense use and its technical specs are likely insufficient for some software I will likely need to use if all my teaching goes online in a more serious manner for next academic year.

If my laptop goes or at some point proves unfit for purpose, what should I do? I could try to buy another one online from my own pocket and hope it gets delivered soon enough (as dealing with emails on my phone will definitely not do my eyes and hands any favours), but should I? Or is this now the obligation of my employer? I think the latter, as ‘my’ laptop is no longer something I marginally use for work (eg when travelling to conferences) or as a convenient way of time shifting (to try to minimise time in the office as much as possible in search of a better life/work balance), but is mainly dedicated to my personal use. Right now, my laptop is the bit if University IT architecture that keeps me connected and working from home.

My impression is that the same is true for a vast majority of the (UK) higher education workforce, as most members of staff have not been given laptops or other equipment. The unsustainability of the situation creates an impending tidal wave of IT procurement for (UK) universities.

Challenge and opportunity in post COVID-19 IT procurement for HE institutions

As ‘online higher education’ (in whatever form, including blended, flexible and any other labelled models) becomes the ‘new normal’, universities will have to make sure all members of staff have adequate IT equipment (and internet connections, energy supply, etc, but that is a can of worms on its own). This will require all sorts of measures, from moving existing desktop computers to private homes in the shorter term, to heavily investing in a transition to portable IT hardware (probably not the right label) for all staff—including the possibility of emergency deliveries for those situations (and there will be a few) where the existing (privately owned) laptops, routers and other kit stop functioning the day before the most important event (usually a student-facing one, of course).

The challenge will not only be in funding this, which will itself be difficult. The challenge will be in procuring all this IT equipment sustainably. And this challenge comes with a big opportunity for the development of a (more) sustainable IT landscape in the higher education sector (and elsewhere).

The point of departure, I think, should be a reassessment of the technical specs required for adequate working from home activities, depending on the specific activities to be carried out by each member of staff. Some will have extremely demanding requirements (eg if they have to run VR based activities, such as lab replacement work, or have to run heavy duty big data analysis software), whereas others (most of the law academics, eg) will just require basic functionalities for quality videoconferencing, email and cloud storage. The specs should include some leeway to future-proof investments, but should not be such that we are all given flashy top-end laptops with more computing power than we could possibly use.

To my mind, another point of departure should be that the new investment will have to have the smallest possible environmental impact. This means that the strategy should start by reallocating existing IT equipment, continue by acquiring refurbished equipment and, only where nothing else is available, acquire new equipment—all of it having a clear view of life cycle impacts and, in particular, recyclability at the end of expected use life. On the contrary, if all newly required IT equipment was bought new, this could create a significant negative environmental impact in the transition to the ‘online new normal’ of higher education (and other sectors). It must be avoided.

Finally, this also creates an opportunity to undo the shortsighted cuts in IT support that some higher education institutions have been implementing, as well as develop new capacity that could generate teaching and research synergies. Universities are complex institutions and there seems to be certainly a lot to teach and research about how they design, create, revise, adapt, maintain and dispose of their IT infrastructures and equipment. I am sure some engineering departments could make great contributions to the improvement of the system if some tasks where reconsidered and, in particular, brought back from the myriad outsourcing arrangements currently in place.

New Paper on Extraterritoriality of EU Procurement Rules

I am presenting a paper on the extraterritoriality of EU public procurement rules at the research workshop "Extraterritoriality of EU Law & Human Rights after Lisbon: Scope and Boundaries", held at the Sussex European Institute on 13 & 14 July 2017.

The paper is entitled "An Ever-Changing Scope? The Expansive Boundaries of EU Public Procurement Rules, Extraterritoriality and the Court of Justice", and is available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3000256.

As the abstract indicates:

This paper looks at how the EU public procurement rules have shown a tendency to permanently expand their scope of application, both within and outside the EU. Inside the EU, the expansion has primarily resulted from blurred coverage boundaries and a creeping application outside their explicit scope. Outside the EU, the extraterritoriality has concerned scenarios such as the applicability of EU financial rules to procurement carried out as part of the EU’s external action in other areas (such as common foreign and security policy), or the regulatory transfer (or ‘export’) of EU procurement rules as part of trade deals—notably, the EU-Canada CETA, but also the EU-Ukraine DCFTA.

Concentrating solely on the ‘external’ dimension of the expansive scope of EU public procurement rules, in trying to explore some of the impacts of the extraterritorial effects of EU public procurement law on the legal and regulatory systems of third countries, this paper focuses on the implications that this expansion and extraterritoriality can have in terms of jurisdiction of the Court of Justice, as well as in terms of difficulties for the coordination of remedies systems in the area of public procurement. The paper concludes that the extraterritorial expansiveness of the EU’s public procurement rules is creating areas of potential legal uncertainty that deserve further analysis. Given the highly speculative nature of those scenarios at this stage, however, the paper does not attempt to provide any specific answers or tentative solutions to the issues it raises.

I intend to review the paper after the workshop and will appreciate any additional feedback that helps me improve it so, if you have the time and inclination to read the paper, please email me any comments to a.sanchez-graells@bristol.ac.uk, or feel free to post them in the comments section. Thank you in advance for any input.