The case mentioned by 'Sad' about his supervisor wanting to 'hijack' his original work does not come as a surprise to me any longer ( Legalised blackmail in academia ).

I know of a few cases in my university up north of the country where certain supervisors abused their position of power by piggy-backing the honest work of their supervisees. It is no relief either to know that a few of these supervisors had actually gained promotion to associate professor and professor status partly because of such 'collaborative work'.

It is also known that certain professors have compelled their supervisees to undertake postgraduate research in an area that the latter have no interest in, but one that fits in nicely the grand plan of the former to eventually compile such work into a book that will bear the professor's name on the cover. This modus operandi ensures an easy and fast route to publication, especially those academicians who are desperate enough to publish.

But such 'collaborative work' can also take the form of academicians piggy-backing with one another. The net result is that these academicians are well spread over a number of research projects with their names attached to them although some may not be actively involved in these projects. This is certainly one short-cut to promotion, all done under the pretext of doing 'cluster research'.

The action of these senior academicians clearly gives a wrong signal to junior ones because the latter would then consider such intellectual dishonesty as part of the academic culture, and it is

ethically okay.

Another side-effect of this approach to research is that those who opt to do individual but painstaking research are seen as a misfit. What should also be of concern to us is that such individuals are not given due credit and recognition and properly rewarded by the university concerned. It is no exaggeration that certain conscientious, intelligent and diligent academicians eventually leave the country after realising that their intellectual contribution is not given due credit. Obviously a brain-drain has occurred in this sector.

This situation arises out of a push by the university authorities and the Higher Education Ministry for a quantitative as opposed to qualitative increase in research. The emphasis made is clearly a wrong or misguided one as quantity does not always equal quality especially when many things are done in a rush.

The authorities concerned must take a hard look at the public universities before they hurriedly assign a misleading status of academic excellence to these institutions. Soul-searching in this case can be quite useful an exercise.