ZEW President on Appointing Professors

This article appeared in the November edition of the ZEWnews.

When it comes to filling vacant teaching posts, some faculties of economics in Germany have proven to have a specific set of selection criteria, which should be re-considered.

Of course, the most significant criteria is the scientific excellence of applicants. This point should be completely indisputable and it usually is. However, in its practical implementation, this guideline sometimes gets overly simplified. In the end all that matters is the number scientific contributions in internationally highly renowned journals. All other aspects are disregarded, such as further scientific work, didactic ability, teamwork skills and willingness to cooperate. As a result, the applicants are only ranked according to the number of publications in top international journals (if necessary, there is a standardisation regarding age), and only the five highest-ranking candidates are even invited to an interview.

Of course this might have gone well in some cases, but undesirable developments can be seen in individual faculties. For classes taught by one of those professors, the students' ability to endure it deserves the highest admiration, while the research activities of the faculty in question turn into a chaotic glass bead game, to put it in somewhat exaggerated terms.

Again: I don’t intend to promote mediocre scientific work. Still, it is crucial to reconsider whether it is reasonable to make the number of articles published in top journals the only selection criterion. In the meantime, word of this tendency has spread among young academics, with sometimes irritating consequences. Not long ago, a very promising young researcher explained to me in great detail how he had managed to "place" an article in a very renowned scientific journal by using "strategic citation". To my great surprise, the article’s content was only mentioned in passing. Rumour has it that especially in English-speaking scientific circles various “citation circles” exist. (Which means: "if you cite me, I will cite you"). Some years ago, an American researcher was asked why he had not quoted the original article, written by German researchers and printed in a renowned English-language journal. Instead, he had quoted the introductory summary by a fellow American scientist. In a very amiable tone he replied matter-of-factly, "It does not pay off to quote a German".

Making the number of publications the only criterion has additional consequences, which need to be considered. Any engagement in academic autonomy, scientific peer review (at research foundations, scientific journals, etc.) or economic policy advice does not further one’s career, measured against one single criterion. Who will complete these crucial tasks in the future? Researchers who are getting close to retirement and have the most productive phase of their career is already behind them? Who will dedicate themselves to teaching and do more than what is absolutely necessary? The junior professors who are obliged to take on those (large-class) lectures that their colleagues do not have the time or inclination to give?

Conclusion: Scientific excellence - definitely. Numbers of publications alone - questionable.