AGAINST MORALISM AS A FUNDAMENTALISM

There are two conflicting visions at the crossroad of the economic crisis. There are those who prefer cutbacks in public spending and those who claim that there should be an increase in revenue. Everyone acknowledges that the first strategy produces short-term effects, while the second represents greater risks.

It is interesting to analyse some of the collateral effects, which are not always addressed.

Trying to increase income and revenue requires a coherence of thought that is not always fully explored. Let us speak clearly: this option implies a system of incentives that are not always organisational, but given directly to the people, to the agents, so that they are more committed to fighting for a place in the train of opportunities. If the Universities need and want to increase their revenue of non state budget origin, they must provide reasons for their human resources to deviate from the planned routine and do their best to seek new projects, generating additional financial income.

This management option is hard to implement and faces some challenges. One of them, whose effect cannot be disregarded, is the fact that it provokes moralist impulses, which come hand in hand with a conservative genetics. Let us speak frankly: this opposing force is the resistance of those who believe it’s immoral (sometimes agitating the ghost of the illegal) for a researcher to receive complementary allowances of any kind. It doesn’t matter that the Portuguese law is clear and explicitly consents it: they are ideologically biased against it – they believe that people should make sacrifices without receiving any rewards because “that’s the way it should be”. The result of triumph of this is stagnation and even shrinkage. After all, who will work for nothing? Thus people turn to other activities and the researchers devote themselves to writing academic papers, contributing to a mere paper counting that is economically and socially irrelevant.

This opposition becomes even stronger in times of crisis because it is founded on the principle of envy, and we all know that envy is less damaging when everyone is fed up to the back teeth.

But understanding this factor – that human resources must be rewarded if we want to extract from them positive systemic results – is key in a Science and Technology policy that responds to the winds of modern times.

Luckily, the European Commission’s announced policy of legitimising economic rewards to researchers confirms that we must fight the permanent feet dragging of those who do nothing yet do not wish others to accomplish anything.

In times of crisis, the Universities will be thankful to each one of us who contribute to a win-win.

Photo credits: Flickr