Temple

Analysis of the interviews has identified, besides a typology of academics, the phenomenon of ‘playing the game’. A definition of this phenomenon, in the context of the research, is derived from the comments made by the interviewees. One definition is adherence to workplace rules, but not necessarily compromising one’s beliefs. Other academics defined it as being flexible with one’s own work standards to such an extent that you appear to be complying with what is generally expected, and still maintaining your integrity. Although the research indicates that seasoned academics are those most likely to cope with the recent changes in Higher Education, that does not mean they no longer need to ‘play the game’. In fact an academic’s ability to ‘ play the game’, no matter what descriptive category they may be assigned, seasoned academic, new academic or academic with a vocation, is central to how well they can cope with their changing and ever more demanding work environment. The neo-liberal model of competition and performance measures which universities have been pursuing, has altered university culture from Cardinal Newman’s (1852) ideal of a university as being a place of teaching universal knowledge with a culture which is essentially concerned with compliance and game playing.

The following comments by a Monash and University of Melbourne academic illustrate how they negotiate the tensions between being compliant and retaining autonomy:

… learn how to play the rules. Play the rules but you don’t have to sell your soul. I

mean they’re not so, it’s still not so … this is not Henry Ford 1925 where you just do what you’re told. You still have some freedom left, some scope to offer a choice. But basically

understand what the rules are and work to the rules. But that doesn’t mean a flunky.

That’s not what that means, stand up for yourself … (Management Professor, Monash) (Interview 13, p16)

How academics respond, adapt and cope with the transformational changes in the

… to sustain academic work you have to play the game, you do have to play it by the rules and that’s where, I mean, you know, you might be able to do it in a way that you feel

more comfortable with but that’s where, you’ve got to really look at the structures of

work, the type of behaviours that are encouraged and the types of rewards in order to look at the way people are going. (Researcher, Melbourne) (Interview 21, p11)

Why play the game?

The extent to which you ‘play the game’ is often a reflection of the position you hold at the university. Seasoned academics may ‘play the game’ with the intention of leveraging this with trade-offs for more suitable working conditions. As noted above, if a seasoned academic has developed a good reputation in their research area and can command ARC funding, then this prestige can help with negotiating a better working conditions deal. This position of power requires a self-assurance, which sometimes comes with stage in life or life experience but not always. An academic with a vocation may have this kind of self- assurance, but may not. This category of academic may not wish to enter into negotiations about more privileged working conditions, because their concern is more with their discipline area rather than ‘playing games’. It is also interesting to note that meeting key performance indicators (KPIs) on publications may be perceived as a government and university inspired way of controlling behaviour and that the ranking of journals can be a political game (Young et al. 2011; Craig et al. 2014).

An important aspect of playing the game is gaining research funding and getting published in so called A starred international journals.

The following comments from a Monash and a University of Melbourne academic show their awareness of these issues:

… I mean I go into it with a very aware thing that it’s a game … you know and I’ll play the game. So the game is, we know you want research money and publications. You all

know I’m one of the best in the faculty for that, this is what I expect in return. I expect a certain amount of promotion, I expect a certain amount of teaching relief, I expect a

certain amount of support when I need it. (Urban Studies Assoc. Professor, Melbourne)

(Interview 15, p9)

I think promotion, it was certainly understood that if you wanted to get promoted, you

needed to play by the rules and being a public intellectual was all very nice, but where are your articles in high status international journals. (Urban Studies Assoc. Professor,

Melbourne) (Interview 11, p8)

How academics respond, adapt and cope with the transformational changes in the

Those academics who can and do ‘play the game ‘benefit most from the changing work environment. The game players are usually those academics, who have developed a defence mechanism to protect themselves from loss. They have a reputation in their area of research which may command future funding and so play this off against promotion or more suitable working conditions. If alternately, they chose not to play anymore and discontinue their career, they are in a financial position to suffer the least loss. Another reason for game playing is that it is rewarded by the university (Fredman and Doughney 2012) and non- participation can often result in stress and depression.

The consequences of not ‘playing the game’ for those who are the most vulnerable, can be quite dire and hurt the new academics the most. New academics have any number of family issues, whether they are with children or the mortgage, and so they are least able to negotiate better deals for fear of losing everything. They are also the ones who are most concerned about tenure or promotion in order to secure a more stable income or position. The pressure put on academic staff, who cannot meet current demands and play the game is explained in the following comment by a Monash Professor who states:

I have seen people in this department being pushed out, either retrenched or put into a state where they simply have to leave because … and they came here when it wasn’t

this push on an emphasis on research. And then they began to get belittled, encouraged to leave, you know really, it was really, has been unfair in lots of ways. I see the need why

Australians need to do it because we traditionally have published below our, we publish, Australians always published a lot, they just publish in low grade journals, that was our, that was the state of play; so our impact overseas was not very good. And