US scientific research funding is largely driven by nepotism and favoritism. Insiders know but don't talk too much about it. They have a few options: a) just quietly stay in the system trying their best to do good work b) join the gravy train through social climbing c) quietly leave and move on with their careers.
karaterobot|1 year ago
pizlonator|1 year ago
I used to work in academia and was involved in NSF and DOE grants. I’ve been in industry (IC then manager) since then.
My sense is that grant funding was less merit based than industry funding. I’m not saying it’s so corrupt that it should be completely torn down, but there’s just less accountability in academia - you can get a grant, fail to deliver on what you promised, and still get another grant after that and that can be your whole career if you know how to play the academic social game and are good at writing proposals.
nerevarthelame|1 year ago
selimthegrim|1 year ago
throwfgtpwd234|1 year ago
The last time I checked when I worked at a Stanford biomedical university department that was substantially NIH-funded, there were 2 full time employee grant writers who had to supply the government grant process with a laundry list of specific data with each carefully-worded proposal because they were regularly competing with other universities to win a specific grant.
odyssey7|1 year ago
lnwlebjel|1 year ago
Also, if nepotism and favoritism are the criteria for removal, let's start with the Executive branch.
mrguyorama|1 year ago
Insiders right fucking here are insisting they have not experienced that.
Which insiders are right?
Guess what, it's both! America is 350 million people. Most things have been experienced by someone. That does not allow you to generalize usefully.
Meanwhile the women and non-white insiders are still experiencing straight up racism and sexual harassment and sexism so....
mindslight|1 year ago
wileydragonfly|1 year ago