Change at the top

During my PhD, I met only one student who was thoroughly enthusiastic about their work and academic prospects. In fact, they were almost embarrassed to mention how happy they were. Everyone else who I talked to about the PhD experience would bring up something negative. Occasionally this would be the natural frustrations of experimental science – the broken equipment, the inconclusive results. But far more often they were unhappy about long working hours, or an unsupportive (or even discriminatory) lab environment. And I know I wasn’t the only person who quickly ruled out an academic research career because it seemed like your only chance of success was to devote your whole life to your work – especially when even that might not be enough to secure so much as a short-term job.

These problems have not diminished in the seven years since I left academia. What does seem to have changed is the willingness to do something about it. Funders, universities, journals, societies and other organisations that act as the gatekeepers to academic career success are putting more and more emphasis on improving research culture. But, as Rachel Brazil explores on p22, the complex networks of interactions between all the parties involved in academic research have stymied progress. It’s been a lot easier to talk about what should be done than actually do it. And while vast numbers of people continue to apply for academic jobs and excellent science is still produced, there’s little incentive to change the system