Moneyball, Simply For Academia

"Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game" is a majority past times Michael Lewis, published inwards 2003, almost the Oakland Athletics baseball game squad in addition to its full general director Billy Beane. Its focus is the team's analytical, evidence-based, sabermetric approach to assembling a competitive baseball game squad despite Oakland's pocket-size budget. 

I had nil noesis in addition to involvement almost baseball, exactly the majority was real engaging, in addition to I could halt reading. Michael Lewis is i of my favorite writers. I had read Flash Boys, Big Short, in addition to Next past times him, in addition to all of them were real good.

Fundamentally, Moneyball is almost making radical exactly rational choices to the human face upwards of flawed ways of the tradition. Where at that spot is a tradition-ridden unoptimized market, at that spot is potential for disruption: if y'all are brave plenty to gain things differently, y'all tin gain goodness a lot from doing so.  Initially exclusively a few people are daring plenty to run into this in addition to ignore the tradition in addition to status-quo to kickoff doing things differently. The gravitational line of tradition in addition to status-quo is real strong peculiarly at the institutions-level. It seems that at the private level, it is easier to escape from this pull, exactly at the institutions flat this line is almost inescapable because it is safer to gain things "the mode it is ever done", in addition to it is real difficult to shift the entire practices of an establishment every bit institutions are real risk-averse.

Since the faculty recruitment flavor is inwards motion, I started thinking almost how these lessons would apply to faculty search.

Disclaimer. These are my views, non necessarily that of my institution/department. It should hold upwards obvious that I speak exclusively for myself, in addition to I speak subjectively in addition to amongst generalizations which gain non ever hold.

Status quo

Academia is a nonlinear game. The character of the enquiry produced past times faculty has nonlinear rewards/returns. Having 100 enquiry faculty does non laid upwards a subdivision automatically four times ameliorate than a subdivision amongst 25 faculty. It is the character in addition to non the quantity of research/publications that matter.

In other words, horizontal scalability does non work, in addition to recruiting high-performing enquiry faculty is important. If y'all direct keep unlimited resources/appeal, y'all would desire to acquire the stars. In the absence of that, y'all postulate to conception carefully almost how y'all can  discovery stars earlier they move stars and/or when they are undervalued?

Hiring assistant professors fresh out of graduate schoolhouse is i mode of finding undervalued talent. These freshly minted PhDs did non direct keep an chance to prepare their enquiry agendas fully in addition to examine themselves. They volition also hold upwards incentivized to gain their best move to secure tenure at your department. I suppose this is why hiring fresh PhDs every bit assistant professors is the most mutual mode of faculty recruiting inwards the academia.

Among the senior hires, a candidate amongst non bad publications in addition to funding exactly coming from a lower ranked subdivision is, past times definition, undervalued. Most of the senior hires is of that nature. Ah... The R word... rankings! This brings us to the biggest inefficiency/flaw inwards the electrical flow faculty recruitment traditions.

Fallacies of electrical flow hiring practices

Ranking fallacy. 
There is a large premium position on whether the candidates come upwards from a overstep ranked school. The dominion of pollex many departments usage is that they exclusively seriously consider candidates that come upwards from schools at to the lowest degree xx places higher than their ain rankings.

But this is a crazy obsession. Humans direct keep like brains (we are all dumb). It is unwise to mean value that candidates coming from overstep schools are much smarter. It is also non necessarily the instance that they have a much ameliorate education. This is the historic flow of Internet, information/education is accessible to those seeking for it.

However, the candidates coming from overstep schools direct keep to a greater extent than institutional support. This is a nontrivial effect. It takes a hamlet to heighten a child. I ran an informal poll on Twitter amongst 50 votes.

Aside from the branding, what is the biggest payoff of getting a PhD from a higher ranked CSE department?

If y'all direct keep other answer, delight reply here.
(4th option: access to ameliorate internship & networking opportunities)

— Murat Demirbas (@muratdemirbas) December 6, 2019

The students at high rank departments tin easily notice to a greater extent than faculty in addition to students to collaborate with. I also mean value the purpose of regression to the hateful is a large factor. Students inwards overstep ranked departments force harder for achieving more.

In whatever case, the objective criteria is simple. When the search commission evaluates the faculty applications, they should consider the character in addition to quantity of the publications in addition to the coherency of the enquiry statement. If a candidate from a lower ranked subdivision has comparable publication tape to around other i from a overstep ranked department, isn't it ameliorate to hire the old every bit that is a to a greater extent than impressive accomplishment? We should banking concern lucifer for skills in addition to potential rather than lineage in addition to schools.

Hype fallacy.
Another mutual flaw amongst the electrical flow hiring practices is that it is real much coupled to the hype cycles. There is a large premium position on whether the applicant move on a currently hot domain in addition to non plenty emphasis given to the toolkit of the applicant in addition to the potential application areas of this toolkit. The domains are ephemeral, exactly the toolkits are long lived. If a candidate has a skilful toolset, it is slowly for her to switch domains, in addition to move on many domains.

For example, instead of trying to hire machine learning people who are inwards high need past times all departments, it would hold upwards a ameliorate strategy to hire people who are undervalued. Maybe hire theory people, programming languages people, or people who direct keep formal methods experience, exactly amongst practical twists. After the large players accept their pick on machine learning people, in addition to when at that spot is an excess of high character machine learning candidates on the market, hire from machine learning.

Charisma fallacy.
I mean value the departments attention every bit good much almost how good the candidate's verbalize went. That is non a real relevant science for academic success. Organization of the presentation, yes. But the delivery of the talk, in addition to looking skilful doing it, does non direct keep much to gain amongst the character of the researcher. Many high caliber researchers are non real skilful on thinking on their feet, in addition to nor are they required to be. Yet, unfortunately around candidates acquire penalized every bit they gain non come upwards across every bit high unloose energy or assertive enough, in addition to their presentation is non lively. It is ameliorate non to laid upwards this mistake, in addition to recruit these undervalued researchers.

This squall for is also relevant to increasing diversity. Increasing the diverseness of the departments are real of import in addition to really beneficial to the departments. I am happy to run into that this is at i time strongly encouraged amongst novel systems position inwards house inwards many universities. The faculty should move on inwards banking concern lucifer the hidden biases they may direct keep during the candidate see in addition to evaluation.

What are optimal strategies for recruitment?

It is somewhat slowly to work organisation human relationship for the inwards a higher house fallacies. But devising optimal strategies for recruitment is real hard, in addition to is beyond my pay grade. From what I tin see, at that spot aren't much move on this out at that spot either. Are at that spot whatever data-oriented report on faculty recruiting amongst controls? Are at that spot whatever departments that play this moneyball game better?

I don't direct keep answers, I exclusively direct keep questions.

Is it ameliorate to recruit a candidate that is from a weak surface area for the department, or a candidate that aligns amongst a strong surface area for the department? Both has around advantages. It is non real clear, which would hold upwards ameliorate when.

Being a successful faculty require unlike skillset from existence a successful PhD student, such every bit existence a skilful mentor, squad builder, novel thinker, proposal writer, fifty-fifty organizational skills. What are ways to evaluate these? For around of these nosotros rely on the recommendation letters, exactly this is non objective?

What are best ways to objectively measure the inventiveness in addition to vision of the candidate?

How gain nosotros mensurate how skilful a supervisor in addition to collaborator the candidate could be?

Share this post