Friday, December 2, 2011

Feeling the pulse - I


Last weekend, I started reading TT Ram Mohan's book "Brick by red brick" on the making of IIM Ahmedabad.  I am enjoying this book very much.  I am not exactly good at book reviewing, nor am I an expert in the technicalities of institute building and institute policies, but what I like most about the book is that the author manages to convey his excitement in exploring how IIMA took shape.  In the four chapters that I have read so far, he spends a considerable time explaining what went on in the first five-ten years (with the first full time director at the centre stage) and strongly emphasizes that the institutional culture in these initial days played a very important role in what IIMA is today.

While I continue to read the book, I can't help but relate the history of the initial days of IIMA to what is happening at N1 right now [1].  Thus, since the last few days, I have been trying to "feel the pulse" of N1, with respect to the academic/professional culture as well as non-academic life.  Perhaps, it is too premature to do so, given that N1 is "under construction"and so is my own academic career!  But, I spend almost all my time here and want to understand the place better.  So, I suppose there is no harm in contemplating upon these matters over a couple of posts.

I am unable to pin down a word or phrase that would adequately describe the prevailing culture at N1.  But, I did realize that there are a few aspects in the functioning of this institute which we now take for granted and which have made a very positive impact on my life here [2].  One of these is the approachability of our top administration, including the director, registrar and the deans.  We are allowed to walk into their offices any time we need to [3] and we unhesitatingly email them if they are out of station.  I am of course not implying that everything we ask for gets approved.  But, at least, we have the freedom to ask and ask directly.  Also, if they agree with us or if we are able to convince them, the implementation of the approval is fairly quick.  I also like the fact that it is usually enough to forward the concerned authority's email with approval to the concerned office assistant instead of running from office to office, getting paper applications signed from all parties concerned.


My only concerns are the following:

1) Since approaching the authorities directly saves a lot of time, I tend to do this very frequently and then, forward the approval to the concerned office assistant.  Am I alienating the office staff by doing this?  

2) As the institute grows rapidly, the authorities cannot possibly continue to be so flexible and approachable.  After enjoying the current favourable circumstances, how will we adjust to longer procedures and the more elaborate hierarchy (which is inevitable as the institute becomes older)?  


The reader's feedback about these concerns is most welcome.

I would also like to hear back from you about what part of the daily culture of your institute/university you enjoy the most.  

I will try to write more about N1 culture in the next few posts.  I suspect that what is going on here might be very similar to the situation in a lot of other institutes, especially the new ones.


[1] For this reason and also for the positivity exuded by the author, I highly recommend it to all young faculty members in India.
[2] and which also make it much easier to deal with things which are not-so-good.
[3] with just exceptions of course.  In order to not interrupt important meetings in the director's office, we first call up his secretary to check if he is free.

4 comments:

Pramod said...

(which is inevitable as the institute becomes older)?

Is this really inevitable? I used to work a fairly big company which had about 4k employees and one the best things about that place was that the CEO and the VPs were extremely approachable and nice. If they could do it why can't an academic institute?

Mostly Rational said...

Nice piece.Keep blogging. Regarding your second question, I think the key is whether the institution is willing to adapt to the needs and concerns of the faculty and flexible enough to seek ways to improve the functioning of the institute based on suggestions provided by all members, not just faculty.

You might also like to check out this article :-)
http://indiabioscience.org/node/342

Kaneenika Sinha said...

Hi Pramod and Mostly Rational,
Thank you for your comments.
Pramod, glad to hear about your experience at your company.
Mostly Rational, thank you for the link to the indiabioscience article, which addressed a lot of important points, especially the one about understanding rules and regulations and remembering that these can evolve through the involvement of all institute members.

Ragamuffin, PhD said...

1) This tends to be my approach as well. When attempting to figure out how the hierarchies in my institution work, I usually approach my authority (usually a PI) first, and go through the office administrators if the PI requests it in future. I think of it as saving the office staff time as well. But when I send them decisions/approvals/etc. for the first time I ask if this method is what they prefer for communication.

2) I can't really speak to this since I am but a grad student and am not yet involved in the clerical demands of being in charge.

Thank you for writing about this. It's very helpful for me to think about, and I'm interested in the comments of the readers...