E. Arunan
A society that does not have trust and respect as two-way streets is inherently unjust. It would also be unstable, if it becomes institutionalized and people on the wrong side accept it for fear or favor. While it is difficult to know how our nation, society and families were in ancient times, the time in which I grew up, both trust and respect were one-way streets. One can see the fallout of this all around us today. I decided to write about this, more for everyone to think and discuss than for pointing fingers at anyone or a group.
Hierarchy is important and perhaps essential for an institution to be functional. By nature, it must be a one-way street. We do need leaders at every level, from a Family to an Institution to a State and Nation! They are needed to make the final decision, when there are diverse views. If not, there will be anarchy! An ideal leader would discuss with all concerned and make a decision that is good for the system, without any personal bias. Listening to all and ensuring that everyone is allowed to have a say are both important. I am doubtful about leaders who believe they know what is good for everyone. I do realise that there could be times when the leader needs to decide based on his/her conviction, that a majority does not like. In a democracy, such decisions are validated in the next election and the people would approve if they saw the benefits of such a decision. Leaders do need some privilege and protection to avoid frivolous complaints which could hamper their functioning. However, such privileges and protection should not be misused to bully any individual or group being led.
Our tradition encourages students to fall at the feet of their teachers. Addressing teachers as ‘Sir’ or ‘Madam’ continues everywhere. I remember reading somewhere that ‘Sir’ stands for ‘Slave I remain’. Our society trains everyone to be either a master or a slave. Standing as equals and talking to each other seems alien. As fellow humans today, I do not see any reason for anyone to fall on another person’s feet. On 29th September 2010 our past Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was handing out the first Adhaar card to a person from a tribal area. On live TV, the tribal person fell on the PM’s feet. The Prime Minister was not doing a favour by giving the Aadhaar to a citizen. This should not have been allowed and yet it was happening live.
Academic bullying is real and is discussed regularly. A sponsored feature article in Science says 8 out of 10 scientists face hostile behaviour during their careers (source link). Prof. Sherry Moss, co-author from Wake Forest University is quoted as saying “those who had been bullied or abused were unlikely to report the abuse due to fear of retaliation”. This article mentions about the foundation of ‘Academic Parity Movement’ founded by nanotechnologist Morteza Mahmoudi and activist Saya Ameli Hajebi, to help end “academic discrimination, violence, and bullying”. Moss and Mahmoudi have published an article titled “STEM the bullying: An empirical investigation of abusive supervision in academic science” in 2021. (source link) American Society for Cell Biology hosts an article by M. Perillo titled “Bullying in Science: Let us face the problem” (source link). It appears that Springer has introduced a Journal to discuss this: “International Journal of Bullying Prevention”. Publishers would not lose an opportunity to start one more Journal.
Several Academic Institutions in India, including the Indian Institute of Science have recognized this and have formed Committees to investigate this. They organize talks, workshops and interactive sessions to address and reduce academic bullying. In addition to sexual harassment, a general workplace harassment is being discussed. We had a talk by Sasha group organized on 19th March 2025 at the Inorganic and Physical Chemistry Department. I learned about a comprehensive study carried out by Indian National Bar Association resulting in a report titled “Sexual Harassment at Work Place” written by Garima (Prabhat Books, 2017). The report has 47 pages. Let me quote two alarming statistics. Nearly 88 % of the respondents have said sexual harassment happens and about 69 % did not raise a complaint to the internal committee. In the informal survey conducted by the speaker in our Department, 30 respondents mentioned that they are either victims or aware of sexual harassment to someone else. I do hope our Institute and every organization finds a way to reduce and eliminate this. Beyond rules and regulations, raising awareness and preventive measures would yield better results.
A faculty-student relation has a hierarchy that is needed. Typically, the teacher has experience in a field and the student is a beginner. A student needs to follow the suggestions in carrying out research. A faculty member can only decide when some work can be written for publication and which Journal is more appropriate or when a student could submit his/her Thesis. I have heard from some students disagreeing with such decisions by their mentors and my response has always been, faculty members know better to make these decisions. This hierarchy is indeed needed. However, it should not lead to bullying for personal benefits. Some years ago, a faculty member of Indian origin at the University of Missouri, Kansas City was accused of exploiting his students. The news report mentions the following: “the professor compelled his students to act as his personal servants. They hauled equipment and bused tables at his social events. They were expected to tend his lawn, look after his dog and water the house plants, sometimes for weeks at a time when he and his wife were away.” (source link) I suspect such bullying happening in our midst goes unreported largely.
Let me focus now on bullying by some members who sit in the committee to decide funding, promotion, appointment and so on. As a new investigator submitting a project to DST, my presentation was stopped after a few minutes and irrelevant comments were made which silenced me. When I was presenting my first research project for funding, Chair of the committee stopped and asked me: “How many papers have you published after returning to India?”. After an energetic and enthusiastic presentation for the first 10 minutes, I became dumb staring at the committee, listening to comments that had no relevance to the project for another 10 minutes. Thankfully, some members who remained silent during the presentation understood the significance of the project. I was asked to submit again adding a co-investigator with Engineering background. I eventually got the funds to build the pulsed nozzle Fourier transform microwave spectrometer. We built the first one in India, which remains the only one as of today.
I became a member of the Programme Advisory Committee of the Department of Science and Technology for Physical Chemistry and had the opportunity to see the other side. In the very first meeting we had, a senior member in my committee was treating a principal investigator in a patronizing and condescending way. I did not like this. As a new and young member of the committee, I kept quiet during this first interaction. When it was over and the principal investigator left the room, I complained to the Chair of the committee about the behaviour of the senior member. Thankfully again, all other members of the committee agreed with my observation and the senior member was asked not to talk like this to any investigator seeking funds. Approving or rejecting a proposal is the prerogative of the committee. However, no member of the committee has any right to talk rudely to an investigator.
I have heard horror stories from young faculty about bullying by a senior colleague / committee member / chair / anyone who considers him/her superior. Several such comments are difficult to believe. Why do some experts behave this way? It is clear that no one had told them it is inappropriate. A young assistant professor, incidentally an accomplished woman, was making a presentation about her progress. One old expert stops her and shouts: Your advisor never did anything, and you will not do anything either! The young faculty had tears in her eyes. The Director should have stopped this abuse, and it did not happen. This same expert was invited to give an Institute Colloquium in an IISER. He finds a young faculty member doing research in an area which he thought was useless. We do have experts with very little breadth in science coming to such illogical conclusions. At the beginning of this Institute colloquium, with all students and faculty members from all disciplines attending, the expert starts by saying: “I cannot believe you guys hired this guy!” This was not only insulting the young faculty member, but also the collective wisdom of the Institute. A proverb in Tamil says the following: Any speaker should be mindful of what to speak based on the place, circumstance, context, and audience. Several of our leaders in Science have not been mindful of this. When I started my career about 30 years ago, I was hoping such inappropriate comments by senior faculty would stop with that generation. My own experience and experience from several young colleagues indicate that it is worsening, if anything.
Academic researchers who make it to any committee that can decide the fate of a young researcher should treat this as an important and enabling duty. It is not for wielding power to put down people and stop research by some youngsters who may appear to be a threat. While this is expected of anyone joining a committee, it is important that funding agencies ensure that no expert resorts to such bullying. It is also important for the Chairs of committees to stop an erring member and assure the presenters. Presenters should be given opportunities to bring any such act by a member in a confidential manner to higher authorities. I do hope people coming to the highest level do not resort to such activities. It is not easy for any system to handle a king who does wrong. I am aware of a Latin legal maxim, which means ‘king can do no wrong’. This is taken care of in a democracy by ensuring that no one is given indefinite power. Let us find a way to stop bullying at home, workplace, our streets, city and country.
Prof. E. Arunan is a renowned experimental physical chemist focusing on spectroscopy and dynamics of molecules and clusters. He is a Professor in the Department of Inorganic and Physical Chemistry, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bangalore, India.
Views expressed are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of Confluence, its editorial board or the Academy.