The University as a Sociopath

Previously I wrote about the Loyalty Tax on Academic Staff. The idea being that staff who are loyal to the institution are not rewarded with loyalty, or good conditions, but instead exploited. This may be because, I suggest, the institution suffers from Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), commonly referred to as sociopathy. It may seem odd to attribute a human condition to an organisations. But organisations are legal persons, in that they can enter contracts, employ people & in the case of educational institutions shape the behaviour of their students. 

Organisations, like sociopaths, may lack empathy & seek to exploit people by manipulating their emotions for their own benefit. This can be seen in advertisements where organisations claim to care about their customers. Obviously an organisation can't really care and is using this marketing device to attract customers. The same can apply to the staff of universities: the university is not capable of caring about the staff, but pretending to do so may be cheaper than providing good wages and conditions. 

This is not to suggest universities are inherently evil. However, we should be careful not to project characteristics, such as care and empathy, ontio an organisation. Staff and students of universities need to carefully check what they are signing up for: what is it agreed they will get. Unwritten understandings are not worth the paper they are not written on. 

There have been numerous studies of ASPD amongst university leadership, such as Perry (2015) and Forster & Lund (2018). However these address the problems individuals can cause within an organisational structure, not the behaviour of the organization itself.

References

Forster, N., & Lund, D. W. (2018). Identifying and dealing with functional psychopathic behavior in higher education. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 38(1), 22-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21897

Perry, C. (2015). The “dark traits” of sociopathic leaders: Could they be a threat to universities? The Australian Universities’ Review, 57(1), 17–25. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.306702837325703

Loyalty Tax on Academic Staff

There are frequent expression of concern and even despair on social media, from casual academic staff at universities who feel taken for granted. They don't have high or secure pay, and feel they are not consulted. The usual solution put forward is collective action to force management to improve conditions. However I usually respond by suggesting they ensure they have employment options outside academia, & encourage their research students to do likewise. Some academics find this offensive: of course they know they could get a job elsewhere but they love working in academia, or their field is not one in demand elsewhere. But I suggest they need to consider if they are paying the loyalty tax. 

Well known in the services industry, the loyalty tax is where customers keep their account with the same supplier, year after year. The customer may be told they will receive discounts for loyalty, but instead the supplier knows they can put up prices and reduce service. Occasionally I will hear an academic complaining about being treated badly by their employer after many years of loyal service. But if the employer know the staff member will not quit, there is no reason to provide good conditions. 

It occurred to me academics are paying a loyalty tax. I thought I might write a paper about it, but found many had done so years before:

"The gratitude or loyalty tax describes the expectation that URMM faculty forgo promotion or advancement at other institutions out of a sense of obligation to their current institution [8]. In addition to preventing URMM faculty from achieving career advancement, this may cause the URMM faculty member to experience unhappiness, low work performance, and low work satisfaction." Campbell, Hudson, Tumin, pp.202–206, 2020).

"Lois Defleut used the phrase "loyalty tax" to describe the cost incurred by the faculty who remain at the same university for many years (Blum, 1989). As discussed by Botsch and Folsom (1989), this built-in loyalty tax penalty will be the greatest in the academic fields with the highest demand for faculty." (Fraas, p. 3,1993). 

 'In fact the phenomenon of salary compression is often referred to as a "loyalty tax".' (Barbezat, p. 761, 2004).

This is not to say that staff organisations should not press for improved conditions and individual academics should just give up and bale out to jobs in industry. However, it is in the power of each person to improve their own conditions & those of their students by being ready and able to work elsewhere. If you are teaching research students with ambitions of working in academia, point out to them the very small chances of a well paid, secure job this way. Help look at the alternatives and get the skills and qualifications needed. Such training will still be of use if they are not of the lucky few who get a permanent university job.

References

Barbezat, D. A. (2004). A Loyalty Tax? National Measures of Academic Salary Compression. Research in Higher Education, 45(7), 761–776. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40197392

Campbell, K.M., Hudson, B.D. & Tumin, D. Releasing the Net to Promote Minority Faculty Success in Academic Medicine. J. Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities 7, 202–206 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-020-00703-z

Fraas, J. W. (1993). A Faculty Consistency Pay Program. ERIC Number: ED362108 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED362108