Researcher's Breviary

Alphabetical for a Make-up Removal of Academic Research

1993-98 - Armel Le Bail
Translated with help of Altavista from the manuscript in french

A squeaking hypertexte misinforming document

This document cannot in no case to be modified. It can however be copied and distributed freely. Nothing prevents you from remunerating the author of an amount proportional to your misinformation degree. You can also propose a not-definition of your grown (because all is false in what follows, it is enough all to reverse to obtain the truth or perhaps is this the opposite). Your definition will be built-in if it passes the tests of the commission of local evaluation (me ;-), the name and the author e-mail address will be mentioned (no volunteer since 5 years...).


As a contribution to the permanent debate on the broad objectives of French research, here a list of the tribulations which watch for the basic researcher not prepared with the daily reality of work in academic research laboratory.

The presentation is in the shape of a dictionary of selected words which can be read like a test. An investigation into these some precise words, very evocative of internal problems of operation of the laboratories, would have been instructive. It is impossible, the taboos are too numerous. The definition suggested here for each significant word is thus purely personal, and negative. It was not at all made mention from what went well, the dictionary however covers the whole of the activities of research for a university laboratory of small size.

No solution is advanced. It is because no problem is posed. It is about the report that search is made or made make by individuals who have varied interpretations of the texts which define their functions. They all are almost persuaded to act as well as possible of the interests of the local, national and international scientific community. Naturally, the told stories are particular but the assumption that it is worse in certain disciplines or punctually is not to exclude. The law of silence is respected in the medium. If criticism is rare, it is for a simple and universal reason: what would be criticizable is the fact of men or women who have a piece to be able on the evolution of your career, which signs the purchase orders, which authorize you to return to you to a congress, which can cut you the telephone, etc...

A text to read before engaging in the trade of researcher if one wants to avoid the unpleasant surprises or if one wishes to make career while benefitting 200% from the system. The trade has the dimension, it is seldom placed less although third in the surveys carried out near the young people. For proof, to consult the Onisep-SCP survey " High-school pupils and students vis-a-vis being studied and the trades " (January 94). Researcher comes in second place from the selected trades if there were neither selection nor diploma and in third place among the trades which the young people really think of exerting. That the volunteers reassure themselves, the few unpleasant aspects will not make give up those which, now prevented, will be able to make resistance. They are right to think that this trade is one of those which deserve that one baits oneself to practise it, but no argument in this direction is given in this book... The stage which precedes the input in a laboratory in DEA or thesis is not treated either (choice of the thesis director and of the subject), the consultings and criteria selection given by Mr. L Dermer for the US are to be also followed to France (Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 303-306, 1993), whatever the scientific discipline. The literature which it quotes should be read before any engagement in the direction of research.

Hypertext links make it possible to navigate at will in this dictionary.

Return to the beginning  

List Words

Welcome, adult, amateur, environment, ambition, animation, directory, anonymity, arbitrary, author, authorization, plane.
BasicNEW, voluntary, substitute, patent, shining, budget, office.
Café, computer, horse, quotation, classification, flickering, joint author, cohabitation, collaboration, colleague, commission, complexity, confidence, confidential, confusion, conspiracy, contract, corridor, culprit, cramp, appropriations, criteria, critical.
Decidor, degreasing, to ask, tooth, god, director, discrimination, equipment.
Failure, editor, empapaouter, engagement, team, equipment, essaimer, them, evaluation.
Faculté, federation, formation, form,
Kind, grandfather, group, guide.
Habilitation, high-level, honourable.
Information, data processing, initiate, Internet, interaction, intimidation, intruder, invitation, irresponsible
Book, software.
Mandarin, medicine, household, mercenary, minable, mission, mobility, monopoly, motivations, mould.
Ordinator, organization, osmosis.
Palmes, paranoia, parquet floor, godfather, parricide, pianist, piloting, plagiarism, full-time, weight, policy, pontuelle, pot, foal, premium, principle, price, progress, promotion, prophet, futurologies, publication.
Quality, quantity, search.
Report, radiation, search, recruitment, redundant, referee, relation, thanks, renewal, reserve, respect, person in charge, resources, reorganization, summary-type, meeting, broken, red.
Salary, powdering, signature, tender, subcontracting, defence, subject, additional, trade unions.
Phone, time, thesis, stamp, drawer, toilets, transfer, work.
Valse, vertical, fish pond


-Greeting of the new researcher or teacher-researcher. If you are engaged on the place where you had your thesis, you will probably continue to make research in collaboration with your mentor , at least for a time. If you carry out a mobility after your thesis (the dream of the ministry of education), there are two cases of figure. Your job was with a defined research subject, or not. In fact, in both cases, you will not be likely any to work independently on ideas which would be completely yours, unless nature did equip you with a sturdy character. The thing is regulated in advance, generally in restricted consulting of few laboratory high level members. It is the policy of "each one my turn" of the director, unless some powerful head of group manages to make the point that it is his turn. You will actually be more affected to a person than to a topic. Exercise: pass directly to the definition of the word interaction and while noting with which interacts the last arrived among the permanent ones of the analyzed laboratory, try to guess which would be "a head of group" and in which year it was his turn. A consulting: the main thing is to have the job, even at the price of an imposed research subject which is not appropriate to you. You will work there with your personal vision, anyway. Nobody will be able to prohibit to you to immediately devote X% of your time to personal activities and hardly later, 100%.

-Adult. Word pronounced with any change of director by himself: isn't the laboratory became adult... odd reflexion, isn't it ?

-Amateur. Put besides some professionals of management powdered here and there, all the others are amateurs, from the basic researcher to the president of university. It is however your capacity with the management (of human resources as well as of appropriations) which has the most chance to ensure you a fast promotion. The amateurs do not tend to surround themselves by real professionals. But after all, the Titanic was built by professionals and Noah's Ark by amateurs.

-Environment. Good or bad according to the degree of participation in the decisions, the awakening to the system defects, the fact of regarding as normals some stories told here, the amount of empapaoutage...

-Ambition. To declare that one is not-candidate for an election of the director of the laboratory appears completely incomprehensible to the average academic who quite naturally seems to believe himself as qualified as any of the others for such an office. Notice that he really does not dare to declare candidate, he prefers by far that his person asserts himself like single obviousness or at least that a plebiscite encourages him. The outgoing director has, him, a precise idea of the essential capacities whose his successor will have to be equipped to continue his work. It goes without saying, being a university laboratory, extreme competences in the curricular areas, of the administration of the university and research are necessary. That excluded de facto the full time researcher, you are warned.

-Animation. The high level senior  researchers have a role of animation of the others. To give life to a zombie belongs to the black magic. From there to treat the rare researchers of very high level of necromancian would be a little strong all the same. A nobler word is used: god.

-Directory. The telephone directories by departments of CNRS are filled with information of all kinds. They are to be consulted imperatively before postulating at the entry of a laboratory because they are completely revealing local habits, in particular as regards persons in charge. You find there laboratories enormous from 50 to 200 permanent which display an impressive list of research topics, and there, with the column "persons in charge of topic" there are some alternatives. The 10 or 20 topics can have one person in charge, who is being the director of the laboratory. Not really the democracy. There, his name is repeated 10 to 20 times, laughable. It is clear that the general presentation of the directory does not lend itself to this particular case, it is sure that the directors of the laboratories in question would not have dared to present the things in this way, there would have been a simple list of topics, without name. Other possibilities, each topic has only one person in charge or, the topics have up to three persons in charge maximum, alphabetically ordered (or not-alphabetical, which is rather suggestive). It is the mode of data acquisition, computerized, which does not authorize the appearance of more than three persons in charge per topic in the directories  (see form). I saw an exception however once where up to 10 people had been listed like co-persons in charge of topic, alphabetically. I had said myself whereas this laboratory had been democratized violently. Well, not relly, it was an error, repaired the following year... The existence of this imposed limit of three people can be given to you, without laughing, as reason according to which you cannot appear as Co-person in charge of a topic in which you however take part manifestly independently, without seeing year the other "persons in charge". The reply is to create of any part a new topic of which you established yourself as responsible, that goes. Study the heading of the topic carefully, that it is not too reducing. Those which preceded you acted in this way, but they have the short memory and now try to prevent you with arguments such as: it is necessary to avoid the dispersion of the activities of the laboratory, the reducing multiplication of the topics... Especially, you should never let impose the heading of a topic by somebody who would declare you responsible...

-Anonymity. One of the two kinds of researchers, most. In the publicity diffused for the privatization of Rhône-Poulenc in 1994, one could read: " the capacity of research of the Group is pressed on 9000 researchers among whom two Nobel Prize - Jean-Marie Lehn and Pierre-Gilles de Genne -... " Obviously, they lacked place to give the names of the 8998 others. All the researchers and teaching enquiring of the laboratories associated with CNRS appear in data bases of which some can be consulted by VIDEOTEX TERMINAL, in particular at the central base LABINTEL/2. All is not in light in this last base, for example: the exhaustive list of all the personnel attached to a topic is accessible only with one password reserved to certain users: directors of units and other persons in charge of CNRS. Why to have crypted such an information ? One of the explanations could be that in certain laboratories, workers are unaware of being attached to certain topics. Another explanation would be that the persons in charge of topics do not wish that one evaluate the weakness of their manpower, more especially as the personnel is generally attached to several topics and that the percentages of participation are specified. It must exist persons in charge of topic without troop (me for example) or with less than one full-time researcher with managing, the big shame.

-Arbitrary. One can speak in praise of it. The nature even of fundamental research is the browsing of the unknown. Any precise choice of the explored object is arbitrary because unforeseeable is the importance of the possible discovery. In fact, the statistics are clear, 99.99% of the research tasks led to results which appear of low or null importance (for the moment), but to classify research projects according to their " interest ", it is already to try to envisage the result. However, it is true that what interests the man, it is before all himself (his health, wellbeing...), it is better to remember it by writing the projects. The decisions to allot appropriations and all the judgements of quality inevitably rest on a share of arbitrary which generates a feeling of injustice. What is it to better do? To influence the least possible or all to control, neither one nor the other undoubtedly.

-Author. There is in theory only one manner of being a single author signatory of a scientific article, though... To be a joint author, it is very different.

-Authorization of Program (AP). " Everywhere there were small kitties piled up by careful directors. They were often non covered authorizations of programs by payment appropriations, but their holders always did not make the difference. It is for that that we decided to give all the meters to zero. " Words brought back in the 13 the Mars old World 1996. At the bottom a AP is hardly but one AD (Authorization to Dream) which can turn to the nightmare if you really believe in it. The acting manager of CNRS says to us awake you, you had not thought all the same that one was going to give you the money that one had promised to you! Patiently it explains us: there are true money and the forgery, thus made two kitties. In addition if at 31 Décembre you very did not spend, one takes again all to you that remains. Money of the two kitties? Obviously, and moreover, the sum not spent will be deducted of your appropriations " notified " for the following year! The same if you used your assets beyond the authorizations. Good let us recapitulate, that must seem to you today clearly. You see now why your appropriations assemble yourselves to 1 franc this year, actually it is a rounding round-off error, you are with less 96MF, how hope do you to us to refund them?

-Plane. Will not be able to get any more into the plane but the licensed pilots. It is the impression which can give to you a person in load of an equipment in not-free service. Then one cannot make use of it? One needs me? One comes the low tail? Well, not, one does not come any more, one prefers to use a bicycle ! This relational problem does not reach the gods of research: they never face directly the bulldog but send emissary, moreover they own the plane.

-Base. (Researcher of) In Release of July 10, 1997, the Minister declares that it is necessary "to make confidence with the basic researchers". There is however no question of allotting appropriations personally to them. Those will be "to give directly to the laboratories, not with the " programs "". Mmmouais, it is already that, but the appropriations thus remain under total control of the holder of signature to which the basic researcher must like. Did it plait to him? An anecdote to light the thing. Invited with a congress abroad, the basic researcher little loved with any interest to accept at least one of the multiple annual invitations without the agreement of the owner (who in any ways to him would not give it insofar as it considers that the activity of this researcher is not in the line of the topics of the laboratory since it does not work for him). The accomplished fact, it is necessary to obtain at least a financing partial of various local authorities which discreetly and semi-semi-officially (let us not shout it on the roofs if not there would be less money for the buddies who are well-informed) distribute some subsidies (1500F for the dimension is the USA by the Scientific Council + the same thing by the International relations for example). Or else, the system of assumption of responsibility will not be started and the researcher is likely to be there of his pocket. Comes the moment to fill the commands of mission. With the fact if you are CNRS you are likely to have 2 of them to fill, for CNRS and for the University since it supports you financially. With the second command of mission, the candidate a little nervously tired lecturer sees a box " Rank " on the form of command of mission of the University, it puts " DR. ". Then it passes to the box " Function ". You knew already that the rank is not the function, I suppose? Good, he writes " Enquiring basic " in all good faith and an exceeded strand. One week later, its director wedges it one Saturday morning in the deserted laboratory and explains to him that it refuses to sign as long as the function declared " Enquiring basic " will not have been changed. In what? He does not say it. Accustomed to the brimades idiots, DR. answers that there is no question of changing anything (it is ready to treat to to the displacement of his pocket this basic imbecile). What do you believe that it arrived? The command of mission was signed unchanged following Monday. Receiving DR. of the hands of the director the command not signed had taken care well not to preserve it, it (with known and seen of the owner) had immediately brought back it on the desk of the secretary buffer who it Monday was going to find maudit it form not signed whereas it had transmitted it to the director one week earlier. Why the director did sign? Know! It had the weekend to imagine the secretary coming to see it Monday to ask him why the document was still not signed. Undoubtedly it did not find something of coherent to answer him... And when the basic researcher sees himself refusing supports it laboratory for one second annual invitation, which does have to make? **time-out** I him suggére to join the invitation letter d' invitation (which fail never to it describe like a brilliance enquiring essential with good course and level of congress) with its research report de recherche in announce that the financing have can be obtain because of opposition of director (request make in writing of your share of course sûr, refusal of sharp voice of director naturally which wish not leave some trace).

-Voluntary. See pianist.

-Substitute. Candidate for a station open to the national " contest " whose characteristic is not to be the " local candidate ". At one time when to be a teacher-researcher cooperating in a foreign university did not give any more one free ticket for establishment, the nontitular co-operators were used as substitute with many recoveries when they sought to return to France. Files, hearings if you are classified, makes an attempt unbearable results, slownesses of the administration, anguishes. An enormous waste which would be necessary in the event of equal opportunity: when all the candidates for a precise station are completely unknown of all the speakers on all the levels of the selection, rare.

-Patent. With the publications, the framed theses, the conferences invited, the communications with the congresses, posters, books, (...), the patents are one of the centre pieces of the files of request for personal promotion or request for contracts, appropriations for a laboratory, a group or a team. It is known that France is not in the group of head for the number of patent deposited. One forgets sometimes essence: a patent represents a large amount of money wasted if it is never marketed. It would be to better cease counting the patents but rather the mass of the incomes after calculation of the expenditure. It is probable that France would not pass therefore in the group of head. The majority of the small university laboratories have a list of patents which never brought back a kopeck (it is obviously not specified...), but could contribute to start a local event (personal promotion, renewal of credit...).That the appraisers claim the amount of the royalties boxed by those which declare being author or joint author of patent, as well as the sum invested for the deposit of the aforesaid patent. Any negative assessment, after the date where the discovery passes in the public domain, could suggest that the deposit was an error, commercially speaking in any case. Somebody will have benefitted from it, it is certain, in one way or another.

-Shining. Individual irradiating a communicative wave of Good Science. The disease is beneficial for the carrier.

-Budget. Unless obtaining a contract, do not have you, of budget. Funniest is that the thésard of service can be seen allotting a small budget intended for the purchase of books. You, nothing. The basic researcher corresponds to a thin basic amount of approximately 20000F annually allocated at the laboratory. But for itself, nothing. All its desires must pass by the filter of the authority which holds the signature. Generally when you fill a purchase order, you know that it will be signed. But it is because it is not a question of a desire to you. It is your person in charge of group which said to you to control this thing. If it is a large thing controlled on the common appropriations, your person in charge already negotiated with the business leader, not insane. If you were allocated a very small annual budget of, say 3000F, that would make some? The authorities seem to think that you would spend it in the week in carambar (this is why: no the budget). But it is obviously a coarse error. Probably, the sum being so ridiculous, you would think of twice before touching there, you would try to make the best possible use of it, undoubtedly a week before the end of the year. And why not, if your ambition is disproportionate, you would try to convince your neighbor of office to cumulate his thin budget with yours in order to buy to you jointly I do not know what. A way of you " responsabiliser " to some extent. Zut, I am still in full Utopia.

-Office. Place coveted and conquered high fight at the time when it is created or is released. In these times of teaching of masses and fast growth of student manpower, the offices rarefy. It is necessary to know to clutch one at the good time of them, unless that you indiffère and as you can as well express your high level in company of colleagues as isolated. However the shortage does not reach everyone, there are offices associated with certain functions and if you cumulate the functions and/or places of work, then you can pass part of the day to move you of one of your offices (personnel or collective) to the other. Researcher in a university laboratory, teaching with the IUT with 300m from there, teaching at the school of engineer to the other end of the city, chairman of the board... As many offices than of caps and as many places considered as personal property, seldom yielded willingly, even in the event of mislaying of the cap. Concurrently to that, it happens that a parachuted professor is badly accomodated. In the extreme cases, its car can be its only office until the day when it decides to resign and to turn over to its former occupations... Certain occasions offer a spectacle of the type " musical chairs ": removal of a laboratory in more roomy and/or new buildings. The top of the basket is found with privative office, if it were not already done. The still empty parts reserved for a possible future use, do not remain it well a long time. One Monday, it is observed that a squat occurred during the weekend: your colleague of office moved without drum nor trumpet, you should have thought of it before him! Obviously, if your level is insufficiently high, it is disadvised to you of squatter too vast buildings. Nevertheless, aim at a size slightly too large: steal an empire and there will remain to you perhaps a kingdom. See also toilets.


-Coffee. Drink taken ritually jointly while outputting the worst stupid things or by making the most significant decisions. The " room coffee " is a place to attend absolutely, even if one does not drink any.

-Computer. One finishes well early or late by becoming it, would be this only to effectively organize its working time not not to be perpetually overflowed by the requests to solve the problems of a pack of thésards which are not yours.

-Horse. The relationship with search is that the thésards, the contracts, the appropriations, etc... are not under the shoes of a horse. To you it will be said more than one once.
-Quotation. You can quote articles in the list of references of your publications, to be quoted by others, positively or negatively, finally you can practise the car-quotation (almost always positively). The quantitative study of the quotations can make it possible to detect the " hot " topics in emergence and fact part of the activities known as of technological survey. There are other applications well. Studies of notoriety practised more or less in secrecy in particular with the ministry for higher education and search assure to the high level for example seniors of the University Institute of France (in: Elements of Evaluation of the Doctoral Formation and University Search, document of the DRED, July 1992), it is concluded there that "... on average the seniors published more, and quoted more, that the members juniors, with however some notable exceptions. "

-Classification. The laboratories like the researchers are classified by the sections of the national committee and the groups of experts of the ministry for higher education. For the researchers, that arrives to them when they make a request for promotion, in particular for change of rank. The number of stations being generally displayed, the committee gives the number of names of the candidates necessary plus some to the case or. For the laboratories, it is at the time of their renewal that they are classified in A, B or C Contrairement to the classification in A, the classification out of B is reserved for the units which do not fill all the criteria of excellence on which the section was appropriate to base its evaluation. The classification out of C is reserved for the units which have to modify their structure. An example. In theory this classification is done within sight of the work carried out during 3 or 4 years previous. In practice it is sometimes different. In the report of the session of autumn of section 19 (December 5-8, 1995) one observes that a UMR in creation is classified A while a URA to which the creator of the future UMR still belongs, is classified out of B! Includes/understands which will be able. The trade-union elected officials specify in the report: " your elected officials await your reflexions ". You can always announce your astonishment to them, do not expect an answer. See reorganization.

-Flickering. Certain persons in charge flicker with the liking of other persons in charge placed better than them by command non-alphabetic. The Co-persons in charge of research topics which appear in the telephone directories of the departments of CNRS are not completely Co -, there is of them generally one at the head of list which is much more responsible than the others. With its liking, it has the capacity to declare single person in charge in certain circumstances which are favorable for him.

-Joint author. To be a joint author, the fastest short cut is the telephone call. That is to say a person in charge of topic which launches an external collaboration, at a meeting with a congress (attends origin of future work generated following discussions in front of a " poster ", with the banquet of the congress...). The meeting inevitably did not take place with those which will do the work, moreover. To give an example, at the following stage, a sample to be characterized can be able by mail on the desk of the congressman who transfers it to one from his collaborators (rather agreeing subordinate) while indicating: I met so-and-so in Washington, if you manage to solve his problem, that could make an interesting paper. At once known as made at once, or almost, it can be necessary to call upon another local researcher (let us say two months of full-time work for two researchers). Who signs final paper? Five people: the two researchers, the two congressmen and the owner of the external congressman who telephones at the last time (but not the two researchers) to point out that, nevertheless, it would be normal that as a person in charge of the second congressman, it Co-sign him too. The two researchers, informed at the last time and too young people to react correctly plan one moment to also put their wives among the joint authors. They give up it (damage) but add them all the same in the thanks: " the authors wish to thank X and Y for their encouraging interest and for many profitable discussions ". Conversely, to find joint author of an article without anything to have required can also occur. You learn that an article has been just subjected and that you are a joint author. You contributed certainly to work but expressed your intention not to make of it an article and thus you did not write a line of it. The time having passed, your accomplices of an external collaboration who did not have, they, not given up this publication forgot your not-interest for this work and inform you really late that they have just subjected it. In such a case you have the choice: to let make, and that makes you a publication of more, or to make withdraw your name, which is a procedure enough testing for all. It may be even that it is not only your name which had been registered among the joint authors but also that of a congressman having made establish the contact in a remote past for this external collaboration. Can one be responsible for a scientific article which one Co-sign not? Yes, as a large person in charge of the laboratory. Among the flood of very official recommendations which submerges the researchers and laboratories, one is enlightened on this subject by the following text: " the director of a laboratory must be a high level scientist. Having already shown its notoriety, it is easier to him to make reign an atmosphere favorable to the blossoming of the young talents while avoiding carrying shade to them. He, for example, useless is known his name is reproduced on all the publications of the laboratory " (Chemical NCRcS-cLettre°N 42 of Sciences). That one judged good to make this recommendation is revealing that that must indeed occur still nowadays. To avoid falling where that occurs, knowing the flow chart of the laboratory, you can get information starting from base LABINTEL/2 by VIDEOTEX TERMINAL and note if the presence of the director is systematic on " works " published of the members of the laboratory. Yes also as a person in charge of topic: if you have the impertinence to complete a work which enters within the framework of an official research topic of the laboratory, with person in charge, without including as joint author the person in charge of topic, the fact remains that at the next report/ratio of the laboratory this person in charge will put your work in his list and possibly will decide to speak about it in your place...

-Cohabitation. " the cohabitation between researchers and teachers will be in the next years difficult. We must arrange this cohabitation carefully by becoming aware that the living conditions are different and that we should not satisfy us of those of the neighbors. " Michel Beech, director of Chemistry at the CNRS of 1984 to 1990. Words brought back in Chemical Sciences (Letters of the Scientific Departments of CNRS) N°55, January 1996, p. 49. Get you to it Commission Report Quenet.

-Collaboration. They should be voluntary and one could think that all the collaborators should know about all the details in connection with the work in progress. It is far from being the case. A proposal for a collaboration to somebody supposes that you estimate that its competences should lead to the solution of a specific problem which you located, that also supposes that you did not only locate the problem but advanced the things already determining way, you are not besides necessarily only on the subject, it is necessary to be transparent, they are least things. If a collaboration is proposed to you, you can put the following question: if I would obtain the solution with your problem, which Co-would sign paper in the current state of work? The simple fact of putting this question is enough in many cases to break the contact, and it is as well for you bus with the other end they were perhaps already a dozen and you would not have learned it as too late. In addition, specify that if you would not arrive at the hoped solution, you will return their problem without remaining to them hung there (effect swell of snow). If the need is felt to put another researcher in the blow, prevents, and requires to be prevented. In the businesses all that is completely obvious, even if the secret negociations are also current currency, but the non-observance of certain elementary rules leads to the rupture, between people of two different laboratories or same... To collaborate supposes the mutual recognition of the same rights and duties of an equivalent level (it is the case, our higher diploma with all is the thesis). Each part must be able to say not. If the hierarchy is interfered with it, it does not act any more collaboration but of a task that one entrusts to you or that you impose to somebody. I said a silly thing?

-Colleague. Competitor. **time-out** man (with more than de 70%) which share at all your design of it that must be the search, moreover it think that you do not it that you must do (see voir mission). Yourself be not far to estimate that its way to make its trade be not either the good.

-Commission ofevaluation, recruitment... Mix elected officials, named who devote themselves. There are some advantages well to form part of it, but one tells that they weigh little vis-a-vis with the heaviness of the task, you to judge.

-Complexity. To be a scientist is not possible any more for a long time. Art to dissimulate its ignorance plays a great role in a laboratory. The ideal is there never to be, your reputation cannot whereas to grow.

-Confidence. The decision makers can work only in confidence. Hear: especially what one them asks not accounts, and if it why thus use you in the list of the personnel which is used to them to obtain appropriations, should you have access to the files, or even only one word with saying? Have confidence, that devil!
 -Confidential. Do not say yes to light to a collaboration suggested, inform about the practices of transparency or opacity of the proposer. If collaboration goes until the participation in contracts, require to be informed of all the documents (various reports/ratios), especially obviously if it is a business which begins. Do not believe that that goes from oneself. If one does not communicate any more one day to you but part of the reports/ratios, and still when you claim them, break any contact or adapt to a statute of executant.

-Confusion. One of confusions generator of problem in the university laboratories is the amalgam teaching-search. Teaching has its own hierarchy: persons in charge of Licence, DEA, this and that... These persons in charge assume a certain control on teaching personnel and almost naturally tend to cumulate on this same personnel of the responsibilities in the field for search. In fact, nothing is still really written nowhere about an unspecified hierarchy in search: the rank is not the function and everyone is general (doctor), it is the Mexican army. The hierarchical reports/ratios in search function by a process ofengagement where the committed person does not have an other choice only of going towards the laid down objective, more or less by mutual agreement. Engagement to prepare a thesis: you have a reader . Engagement to prepare a "accreditation to supervise resear ", it is for the moment less well defined than for the ex thesis of State (where there was also a reader) but it is felt well that all that will not be long in being codified definitely more... Engagement to sub-contract the framing of a thésard: that can suppose verbal negociations, negotiations, promises of action in favour of your promotion (to make you pass enabling) etc... because nothing is automatic in this field the more so as the subcontractor does not touch the premium of framing. To direct a thesis without laying out flexible subcontractors in sciences is now virtually impossible (see complexity). The practice of the joint management of thesis exists, according to comments expressed by certain university commissions, its defect is to make dubious the identity of the true director (bus it would not know to have there that one Most astonishing it is that the play of the relations hierarchical in search functions by practice: a continuation of last engagements (thesis, to also see the rites ofthe greeting...) while at the same time the objectives of these engagements were reached.

-Conspiracy of old. Even if they only very seldom published together (and still, these some publications go back to the time of their thesis and collaboration was probably imposed by the father founder of the laboratory), oldest form a group extremely welded since it is a question of defending their common interest: control by them and them only of essence.

-Contract. Seldom obtained for your only good mine and competence. Money counters know-how and project precise interesting the investor. Joined the problems arising from search that one makes you make, unless the idea is not you. The investor is sometimes the State by the means of the equipment. There is always a paragraph " manpower mobilized " on the draft contract. As director of laboratory, head of group where ofteam, you have in theory a personnel under your responsibility. There are at least two extreme ways to obtain and carry out the contract. You write only the project, you do not consult the experts whom you assign to tasks scientific specific to the project, you manage only the money obtained (in general for four years), the annual balance sheets that you write remain confidential. If that goes it is really that your personnel is well drawn up. The other way would consist in doing it in team at all the stages, a Utopia...

-Corridor. According to small a entrefilet appeared in Search (date???), one of the places where some do not have that has to pass Co-to sign a scientific article. That could be confirmed.

-Culprit. Vis-a-vis with your administration, you are guilty bad intentions. It is clear that you are on the point to divert the public money with your profit. The number of documents in proof which is required of you is impressive, front and after mission or command of hardware, the signatures of various characters accumulate on the commands of mission and the purchase orders and invoices. The least which one can say is that confidence does not reign.

-Writer's cramp . The record of production of scientific articles by an author (with possible Co-signatures) over 10 years is close to 1000 (Nature, 355, 101, 1992). It is necessary to have installed a system quasi-automatic and/or to have flexible human resources to arrive at such a performance. No French among the 20 first. Is the list of 20 most prolific French desirable? Certainly, even if it would not be inevitably taste of the prizes winner. Challenged, some of the first 20 world found explanations plausible. The production of the average researcher would be rather in tooth of saw. In the case of the laboratory test, the annual extremes are included/understood between 0 and 21. That made all the same an article every 15 days approximately in the last case.

-Appropriations. Unstable amount of money annual allocated for operation or equipment, systematically revised with the fall before the end of the year. There to await the green fire of the accountant before being able to touch at the beginning of year. Even if you Co-sign 25% of the publications which are used to support the applications for credit, you cannot approach some. These appropriations are total and only with the discretion of those which hold the signature. Beautiful encouragement with work.

-Criterion ofevaluation. The list is long in relation to the missions which are defined in the staff regulations. Notice that these statutes evolve/move and of the additional missions can appear with the wire of time. The list is so varied that it is not possible simultaneously to carry on all the activities which are your raison d'être: to increase knowledge, to diffuse it, manage...

-Critical. Impossible to express it without starting the storm. It goes without saying the University could not support writings being able to be interpreted in a direction which would devalue it (what in known as length of the piles silence covering some texts of eminent members, the reading of "Homo Academicus", work of a gold medal-holder of CNRS is recommended here). Contrary to all that one could believe, ADRA is an apology for the trade of researcher exerted under control of the researcher himself. This opinion well-sure is regarded as indefensible by the caciques ones of any hair which would be likely to miss executants if it took the desire with each one for trying to apply it. To express these ideas openly supposes the absence of a plan of career. To write this text while requiring a promotion is, say, awkward.


-Decision maker. Man able to carry out acquisition for the laboratory of an apparatus with 2 or 3 MF without other reason which the observation which this apparatus exists in the competitor laboratories. He never used it itself, he has only one vague idea of it with what that could be useful and besides, for all the research task published of the laboratory, this apparatus was not necessary until there. With his next file of request for promotion, the decision maker will be able to mention that it was responsible for this operation. That four years later there is still no convincing result resulting from this apparatus would not have any importance. For example, it could not be expected that the products most usually studied at the laboratory do not support the processing inflicted by the apparatus and are destroyed before having time to make measurement... In any case, the decision maker is not more occupied since and nobody will never ask him for accounts.

-Degreasing. With the occasion of a reorganization, elimination (of the flow chart of the laboratory) of the non-productive teachers in publications. Threaten which makes reflect...

-To ask. Nothing to require is the surest means of not seeing itself opposing a refusal. The other means is to re-enter in the club of the decision makers.

-Tooth. See parquet floor.

-God. The researcher of higher level to your range. Search is polytheist.

-Director. There are three kinds of named directors of laboratory, the elected officials and the " fathers founders " (who enter the class of " named " since they manage to associate their laboratory with CNRS). The motivation of the personnel cannot be the same one in these three cases of figure. Relatively little people lived the three possibilities during their career and the elected directors are done increasingly rare. Piloting by the node is incompatible with a local election of the director! As thésard of 3rd cycle it goes without saying you will reach only the stage of the observation of the local mechanisms of decision; in enabling in a second laboratory it will be also a round of observation. You will be able one day to find you vis-a-vis with a brutal local evolution of the type of that which is told here. A small coalition the old ones can seek to make play one of the rare existing rules at CNRS concerning the directors: those which are named it are in theory for four years renewable (it is perhaps a rule which does not encourage really a director " with life ", since father founder, has to associate " his " laboratory with CNRS). One of the members of the coalition (see conspiracy), placed well near the direction of the scientific department can manage to make the point that a change of direction is essential. It can even manage to catch up with a blunder of the direction of the department which asked the director if it wished to be renewed. The problem of the choice of the substitute must then be solved. The applicant of change which cannot obviously be candidate without waking up some suspicions, the choice is made quite naturally on the two other members of the laboratory distinctly more graded than all the others (if dialogue there is, you will not be invited there). Lack of local tradition to regulate such a case, it can be the occasion of an innovation. Among the credible options one can imagine an election with alternatives in the field of the selection of the voters (all the permanent ones; permanent not ingenieurs/technicians, the permanent ones of rank higher than this-celà...), or an impartial nomination coming from in top. It is not excluded that in a levelling, admirable dash with the first access, the final decision is announced at a meeting of the permanent members of the laboratory (until there completely ignoramuses). The chance (pile or face) can have appointed possible the new director for two years, this one will yield the place to the loser for the two following years, thus arriving on the whole necessary four years. You will have at once to then express your agreement by yes or not during a vote with secret bulletin. It is probable under these conditions that yes enthusiastic appeared with one crushing majority, worthy of before the fall of Berlin (which could fall besides just at this time there). Note that you will not have had a moment of reflexion. For this parody of election, there no will have been campaign: not question of program, change, consultation, policy of search of the laboratory or others billevesées. No the electoral promise thus, and consequently no obligation with nothing for the new provisional Master situation.If two years later, you learn that to change director every two years would not provide to the authorities ofevaluation the image of a stable laboratory and is thus not desirable, it will not be too astonishing. You will have played pile or pile. Notice thatenvironment could become such as six months later the director would resign without official explanation, put separately the consent of a " lassitude vis-a-vis to certain behaviors ".

-Discrimination. Example: " I accept only the directors of laboratories like interlocutors ", words which could be pronounced very well by a regional delegate of CNRS at the time of a local visit and in the presence of all the personnel of several laboratories.

-Equipment. Nothing to see with the marriage. However, to have an equipment can create a situation favorable to the creation of one or more new couples. Guess which carries the breeches. A head ofteam can obtain very well an equipment higher than that of the whole of the laboratory. If one proceeds by subtraction, that means that the whole of permanent is less better evaluated that a group of them. It becomes clear that the non-members of the on-equipped group have a negative coast. Helloenvironment.


-Failure. Undoubtedly the thing most difficult to recognize for a researcher. See drawer.

-Editor. Man responsible for a scientific periodical, to court.

-Empapaouter. Word reserved for the language spoken with the shelter about the eavesdroppers. To illustrate, here an example of empapaoutage. A collaboration between researchers of two laboratories produces publishable results, a first text is written, the list of the joint authors is fixed. Exchanges between the joint authors of the two laboratories make it possible to arrive at the final text. This text is sentto the editor by one of the joint authors who writes then with the others. " All is perfect, I made read the article with Mister the Professor X who found it excellent. As you can note it, it did not modify anything. I naturally added it to the list of the joint authors ". Exercise: guess which was made empapaouter. The terms of filiation are frequent in the profession, to see grandfather, or of religion (God). A more subtle example: some consider the place of last city among the joint authors as a place of choice (see quantity) because it tacitly appoints the large coordinator of work. Consequently, being with this position without being more réputé/puissant/reconnu co-signatories places you above this one and the feeling to have empapaouté this great man would be consequently legitimate, according to the definition. That to say that whose name appears in declared manpower of a request for contract and who is unaware of it. An alternative is that it knows it, but that the file is not communicated to him. In the same vein, as to say members of a laboratory who do not have the occasion to read a four-year plan (which however engages them all) only after it was subjected to the ministry, if not that they were made empapaouter.

-Engagement. Manner of obtaining a work of someone else if you are that which engages. Manner of delivering all its production of search to that which engages you. Engagement occurs at the great stages of your career. As thésard you do not have the choice, all your work Co-will be signed by your reader . Like beginner at CNRS on a topic displayed or not, you are integrated into a team and are engaged to submit your production to the head of team. You can put your sword of knight at the service of your suzerain and frame the thésards which it engages (be quite unable for you, you, to find only the thésards in question, and in any case, you are not entitled to direct search). If you were recruited on the spot, you remain committed under the cut of your reader without same giving an account of it to you so much that appears natural. Ten years of seniority (or more!) and all the publications Co-signed by your ex-director of thesis, it is not rare. If it is your case, think that your colleagues know that one can nothing propose to you as collaboration without seeing coming out of its limps your owner, you are not free, you are committed. With perpetuity, until dead follows, but perhaps await you your turn, your hour, you hope to inherit...
A new technique of engagement is the consequence of redéploiment in the direction Paris-province. Imagine that you must remake a life elsewhere and that this elsewhere is located where wishes to settle your directeur/chef groupe/chef of team in agreement with the organization of supervision. It is unconditional engagement, with life, good luck. The province-Paris direction is rarer in this moment, but possible. A true declaration of love.

-Team. Word better and better defined in the field of search. With each new circular of the higher authorities are added new characteristics. With football the rules excessively often do not change, seeks some they are refined more and more, of recommendations (on the way of presenting the reports/ratios of laboratory) in formulation written of the criteria according to which you will be evaluated individually or collectively. Among the last precise details, until never officially declared there by the national committee, one finds: a team recognizes itself with X theses per annum, Y conferences invited, Z contracts ... etc. X, Y and Z in perpetual ascending curve. If you intend to make team with yourself especially, that will be increasingly hard. All up there, they issued that good research task cannot be made any more that equips some, of which they will be the heads and the spirit.

-Equipment. Any material object which enters to the laboratory to be used for search. You will be able to see very well arriving in the office which you share with a colleague and two thésards, a complement of equipment aiming at very episodically improving the performances of binocular which was already there, used. Somebody of another office, equipped with a binocular more modern good, can have imagined that to improve the binocular ones of the other offices would limit too intense and unbearable circulation become in its own office. An investigation of public utility is not necessary if another model of binocular identical to that that you have under the eyes must be modernized simultaneously in the office of the director.

-Essaimer. When your formation is finished and that you form part of the researchers of highlevel, it is strongly recommended to you by certain commissions of essaimer to diffuse elsewhere your knowledge and your expertise. Indeed at the place where you have been just trained, your knowledge already exists and you make double employment with your trainers if ever you on the spot are recruited (and even, you make competition). However, a high percentage of new recruited are it on the spot.

- Them. Not us.

-Evaluation. Word of recent origin. Regular exercise and more and more codified (see criterion) which non-endormissement seems now necessary to high level researchers on their bay-trees as well as has to go up the straps of the researchers of low level.


-Faculty. If you have the choice, prefer to begin your career in a young Faculty, or even in full creation. Your chance to become responsible will be largely improved by it. The rate of advance will be affected of a multiplicative coefficient certain bus all that will be made after your arrival, you will be able to say that you were there, perhaps even will be able you to say more if you are Décideur.

-Federation. Word appeared to justify fusions of small laboratories in entities of critical size for a better effectiveness in the field ofthe organization of search. To divide to reign remainder of setting.

-Formation. In search, there are two kinds of formation: with search and by search. In the first case one learns how to you to solve problems in the second one solves your problems your involved (one = reader or personal technical or other agreeing researcher or other thésard). It is after the thesis that that can make a difference. Real competences of the new doctor are not inevitably with the height of the thesis in the event of formation limited to the second type.

-Form. Principal support of the change. Indeed, the forms claimed by the organizations of supervision must be turned over filled, that goes from oneself. If a new form claims you the names of the heads ofteams and of the heads of groups whereas there was hitherto neither group nor team, it is extremely likely to be created some because of the form. A setting in question of the innovation of the form has little chance to be done. The change is suggested by the top simultaneously to hundreds of laboratories.

-Nice. You find that your head of team is nice. It does not have any merit if you serve it well. It will be nice with you as long as you will reconnaitrez it as head, not more. There can also remain nice with you in circumstances which lead you to you to go from there against your " will ". You will have the statute of external contact then.

-Grandfather. Situation of that whose one ex-thésard recruited on the spot directs a thesis. It is not rare that the grandfather is invited like member of the jury. The back grandfather necessarily does not come to attend defence, for various reasons.

-Group. Word immediately invented after the word equips. Large team or association of teams. However, the ministry has just declared that a laboratory is only one and even team... How to reconcile this sight and that of CNRS?

-Guide of the director of the laboratory. It has just appeared. Of course, it is sent only to the directors. The small curious ones which wants to know what it contain will have to manage. Simplest is to ask it to your director: shouldn't this one be the only one with knowing with which sauce it can eat you, you owe also the knowledge, not?

-Enabling. The thesis of State lived, it was used as passage obliged for a progression of career, except exemption. The accreditation to supervise resear now filled a similar role and its contents evolves quickly to that of the ex-thesis of State.

-High level. Not nice, scorning even for those which would not be, you undoubtedly for whom this book is intended.

-Honourable (very). Thesis.


-Information. It rains about it, but selectively, of the press review for all to confidential information. With the credit control (see signature), the control of information gives you the second key of the capacity. The advent of the Fax shook a little the coconut and opened a new passage. Example: CNRS mobilizes of the personnel for a technological, scientific, normal survey; it supervises also what is said in the whole of the media on CNRS. A press review gathering the topicality independent day labourer relating to CNRS was a good means of gathering the personnel around a certain image of their " large house ". You could note the advertisement of the imminent arrival by Fax of this press review in all the laboratories and thus on your premise. If you always do not receive anything, you could plan to challenge your regional delegate on this subject and to learn that, the head office dispatches indeed information with the delegations, charges with those with transmitting to the laboratories, but which it depends on goodwill of deputy to do it or not. Your delegate thus " would have taken on him ", and decides that in any case, it could transmit only with one day of delay, for reasons of obstruction of fax and that, for him, such a delay removed all its interest with the document (two pages of summaries). It had thus not transmitted it. In front of your insistence, it could propose to you to transmit the press review on the fax of your site of work, charges with you making copies and transmitting it with of them to the 4 other laboratories concerned in the university. You accept. There however was nothing to make to decide the delegate to make transmit the review of Friday, indeed, that one could be sent only Monday... The situation was regularized a little now, the laboratories independently receive (in theory) all the review. That of Friday arrives saturdays... You immediately display this review on a table reserved for general information. Some laugh, ridges not attention. Is this the case everywhere? I doubt it, there is frequently a chain link which " takes on him " and decides in your place. Better is worth being informed late than ever.

-Data processing. New probable discipline of selection for a modern future. Pure mathematics played this role in the past. Now it will be necessary to be very strong for a keyboard. It will have excluded there... It is essential to know to make use of it in search in general if not you died. One should not seek further the origin from the explosion of the number of publications: the word processing is there for much.

-Initiate. You become it after having climbed some levels and having taken part in some more or less advisory authorities... You learn how not to reveal certain information who are communicated to you in restricted consulting. It is the beginning, you are for the moment stuck to a cobweb, the path to traverse long remainder before becoming the spider, if it is what you wish. Initiation has its rites and its procession of offences. The retention of information (always justified) is the least.

-Internet. Dépéchez of you there to express you before the critics interfere themselves with it. All the situations exist on the campuses today. One meets the completely free Web server there, at least in certain zones, authorizing to the students to present a personal page if they wish it. With the other extreme there is " the consulting of the institute decided that all new information installed on the server will have to be approved by the director of the institute ". Here. From one University or one laboratory to another, as many degrees in the censure. You think well that if you ask for an authorization, it will be refused to you. Internet makes fear. Do not ask, install your small businesses, if the world is pressed towards your productions, it is the proof that what you offered corresponds to the request.

-Interaction. Theory: two particles of low level (of energy?) having separately a strong interaction with high level different particles which are pushed back, push back themselves too. This theory checks each day in a made up laboratoryteams (or of groups ...). The high level particle is a head of group, person in charge of topic... An analysis of the list of the publications of a laboratory through collaborations with two (permanent Co-signing publications) completely reveals the structure (hierarchical) of a laboratory. Its examination through time would make it possible to establish a history of the careers of each one. One detects there couples, one could even want to further go and to draw the picture of the four , eternal triangles or more. It is not rare to observe a perfect fidelity for at least one of the members of the household (100% of Co-signature) over long periods (10 years or more), while the other members interact on the right on the left... The assessment of production 1959-93 of a small laboratory displaying 440 publications makes it possible to realize. The chronology would have a considerable importance. The total image given by these figures would be strongly modified if the analyzed period were limited to 1959-80. Among the 7 permanent members of the laboratory of then, the 6 last would be found to produce Co-signed publications all, in last position, by A.

   Number of years of presence in the list            short historical
       Total of the publications in the list
A 35 122  A                                           Foundation
B 25  81 27  B 
C 24  84 36  6  C 
D 24  38 13  3 11  D                                  Expansion
E 23 150 28  2  3  3  E 
F 23  81 22  5  3  2 53  F 
G 19  13 11 12     2     1  G                         Plate
H 12  31  8  4       16  9  1  H                      Restart
I 12  16  3    16  4     1        I
J 12  83 14 14 17  5 20  9        2  J
K 11  29             29  4     1        K
L  9   9  3     2     2  1        1  4     L
M  8  35     1       24  9     1    11        M
N  8  12     2  9                    3           N
O  7  28             13  6     2        1           O
P  6  14  2 12  1     3  2     2     5           1     P
Q  5  12          12                 4                    Q
R  5   8     1  8                 6  3                       R
S  2  10    10                                1        3        S
T  2   3              3                                            T
U  2   5                       2
The number of Co-produced publications is with the crossing of the names. Exemplary collaborations are in fat (50 to 100% of coproduction for at least one of the members of the couple). One will deduce what one will want of this table, but certainly not that the interactions are random, neither always free, nor general. The image of Epinal of the laboratory which one thinks welded, coherent, and tending towards a same goal is not restored by this particular case, it is besides as well thus. The researchers are before any individualists and jealous of their independence. The team work does not lend itself on all the subjects of search, far from there.

A serious analysis of the table remains to be made.

-Intimidation. You do not let intimidate. High or low level, all your colleagues have the same diploma as you, or almost. Vis-a-vis with a problem of search identified but which yet was not solved, all the researchers a priori are also stripped. The solution could emerge a priori from an unspecified level, but it will probably emerge from a rather low level and it will be the occasion for somebody to pass at the higher level.

-Intruder. Seek the intruder. It is a exercise to which you will have all the chances to deliver to you if you multiply external collaborations. An intruder (or several) can appear at the last time among the joint authors of a work in the process of publication. You suppose that he is member of the external laboratory, it is the first time that you intend some to speak. You worry about knowing what it did. It can happen that one answers you: nothing, it is a thésard which needs publications to be likely more to obtain the station on which it postulates. With that which answers you that, there remain some bits of honesty, but not too. Normally should manage to you to make withdraw the intruder, or then it will be last collaboration with these outsides with manners of a foreign logic to yours.

-Invitation. To give a conference, with a Ph.D. examining board... As many criteria which show than you curl the high level.

-Irresponsible. Word illustrated well by the fable which follows. To very recently CNRS incorporated in the payrolls the family benefits. Decentralization had then transferred this task to the regional delegations which every year thus sent a form of declaration of situation to all the members of the personnel. One year, the form sent to the atypical researcher of service is a true cloth, a photocopy of photocopy, badly centered and almost illegible. It thinks that some erasures moreover or less will not worsen really the object on which it painfully deciphers " any change of situation must be immediately communicated to us... ". Not having recently communicated any change of a stable situation for at least ten years, it has filled the boxes all the same and dares additional graffiti explaining why, all the same, that made 10 years that one wrote to him to ask him for his address... Horror, a few days later, it is the director of its laboratory which convenes it. The director received a letter of the regional delegate who treats it "irresponsable " and summons it, by the official channels, to properly fill a new form under penalty of ceasing touching the family benefits. He was not carried out, he continued to perceive these allowances. In fact now the Local Cases of Allowance deal with these formS annual, better than at CNRS because the addresses and other information are pre-printed on the documents... Other example of irresponsibility: mine by publishing this text is not now any more any doubt.


-Justification. The strangest actions are justifiable when one manages to make coincide the general interest with his particular interest. If you succeeded in making take off a team (to form 3rd cycle which you manage to make recruit on the spot, they sub-contract one second wave...) and that you remain the single spirit about it, then it is clear that you are, with your team, a pillar of the laboratory. All new recruitment is not " to widen your livestock " but " to reinforce the topic ", essential to survival of the aforesaid laboratory. The increase in the appropriations car-is justified and so on, it is an ascending spiral. It is necessary is to really believe so that one makes is to be of a perfect duplicity. To always find the justification plausible becomes vital.

-Book. You wish to reach a book which has just appeared and which relates to your specialities at the highest point. There are several solutions. You register your request on a list with the university library and you wait. The continuation depends on good-wanting of the person in charge of the library. If you have an unspecified means of persuasion (rank, copinage, argumentation concerning thousands of students...), the book will be probably immediately controlled, if not... You can fill a payable purchase order on the appropriations of the laboratory, it can be turned over to you not signed with the opinion of the person in charge of the appropriations intern corresponding: to see university library... If you have a personal equipment, you control, you have it, your book. Your neighbor of office is responsible for special appropriations known as " of teaching " which it uses with his discretion but always for the greatest collective student well-being (purchases of specialized books, small equipment of practical work which can go to the microcomputer... most of all that is available in its own office). If ever this man makes circulate regularly a paper where it asks for suggestions of purchase of books, you benefit from it to register your request. If it does not do it, you make a génuflexion or two before entering its office and you please begin a sentence by " Mr Untel... " Last solution, you treat to yourselves this book of your pocket, since you are enough null not to have still the least personal control of the least credit. Even thing for a subscription with a review. Each laboratory of sufficient size has its small library, but there are undoubtedly more books and reviews in the offices that in this library. It is always surprising to note that goods bought with public funds find with a blow of buffer " Prof B K ", for example. It is true that an irrepressible feeling of property reaches whoever carries out an acquisition, was it for the community.

-Software. New racket with updating 2 times per annum. Of very good software are in the public domain, they are free but if you are not informed by it, you can buy adaptations very expensive, not inevitably of the last version besides. What interests the software designers of very pointed scientific use it is to be recognized in their discipline and cities by the users in the scientific publications. **time-out** a few ten of specialist in the world be likely d' use their software, a few hundred to great maximum if the under-discipline be significant, or even two or three at beginning if it be in emergence and it be hardly possible to be sure that its software be one of future standard (then one it publish and it be too late then to protect the idea by one patent). Nothing comparable thus with the hundreds of thousands of software of plays or word processing sold. That must show very funny to a researcher a powerful industrialist to market an adaptation of his software 7000FF without other repercussion that a personal satisfaction and even if it were vaguely informed of it.


-Mandarin. The principal criterion for the access to this statute is perhaps the number of presidencies of jurys of theses. Not less than one about sixty per annum for Jacques Friedel who knows what it speaks.

-Occupational medicine . Do not seem to concern the high level academics, because if one sees the trucks well on the campuses, only of the personnel of less high level penetrate there.

-Household with two or three or more.

-Mercenary. There are the regular troops and the mercenaries. To be in the regular troops is comfortable, one deals with very for you but lose you your liberty of action there: all that you make was envisaged by others that you, especially the head who in consequence Co-sign all your production. The other way of working is step by step, a publication after the other, not always with the same ones. It is obviously much more uncomfortable, that supposes with each new operation a negotiation of the working conditions, a definition of the participants, and future co-signatories, the establishment of a moral contract according to which any new evolution of the working group in an unspecified direction must be discussed by the unit of the participants and not only one in its corner... The mercenary is a recluse, deeply individualistic, who sells his know-how. In the facts, few relations of this type are made up, there are too many regular armies.

-Minable. " I have other thing to make to occupy me of your minables publications " can tell you the person who arranged herself to be equipped best in means with DTP (Desktop publishing), while making so that nobody can do as much of it. You will always find somebody to think that your publications are minables (approximately 50% of the population, at least). Reassure, they are minables, but not more than the million of publications which appear per annum in the world.

-Mission. Vast field of possible actions in the trade of researcher. Let us return to the telephone directories of CNRS which still give this time a perfect illustration. In the list of the research topics of the units, it sometimes happens to meet of them some which leave you perplexed. Lu in the directory 1993 of the department of chemical sciences: " administration and management " (p.25); " direction " (p.32); " administrative responsibilities " (p.36); " technical operations and tasks of collective interest " (p.79); " financial management of the laboratory " (p.90); " fastening for command " (p.121); " placed at the disposal... " (p.141); " scientific popularization " (p.169); " various activities " (p.271); " teaching " (p.275); " assistance with search " (p.277); " specific operations " (p.284); This roughly speaking gives you the list of the missions of the enquiring personnel, put aside the principal one. From there to classify some of these missions among the research topics, there was only one step which seems to be crossed. Why not, nevertheless these topics do not concern the discipline of chemical sciences...

-Mobility. The ideal to increase the potentialities of a laboratory as regards search is to recruit a researcher trained elsewhere to avoid the scientifically established consequences of consanguinity. Everyone agrees on top, but it is circumstances where one wishes to preserve an excellent researcher rather (already engaged in your topic, i.e. with the commands) than to insert a wolf in the sheep-fold which could benefit from it to work on its own ideas. According to the absence of text, all authorizes a lecturer lately named to make what sings to him in search, if there is no topic displayed for the station. It is the general case of the teacher-researchers for whom the decision to create a station is related only to the deficit of teachers, while the criteria of recruitment are with opposite...

-Monopoly. It perhaps on an idea, a method a product, an apparatus. You can be a passage obliged in all these case so that your name remains hung among the joint authors of the publication or, less better, in the thanks.

-Motivations to make search. It is primarily of curiosity. One can have some on imposed subjects, it is nevertheless more difficult than on subjects decided by oneself even. At a certain time, the motivations can change: search notoriety, capacity, money, yes it is possible in the medium of search. Is one still a researcher when one is primarily motivated thus (but call that differently: moved by a certain idea of HIS laboratory), perhaps not, in any case one certainly then has very large knowledge-make-to make...

-Mould. Word sometimes employed in a sentence of the kind: " that one, it re-enters well, in the mould ". School of thought which works you so that all that is told in this dictionary appears you to be criticisms unjustified and comments incomprehensible.


-Us. The logic of group is by discriminatory nature. There is them and there are us. For some " us " you are in the group " them ", and it is not very good for you. Geographically, the distance does not count. There are " us " very distant and " them " with a few centimetres. Don't you feel the negative waves which wrap you? Between us, don't you see the things of another eye without them?

-Computer. It still misses a little appropriations so that each of permanent of a laboratory has to it his on its desk. No the problem (in theory) for those which occupy their office alone. The others can ruser: place a computer in a place of the part such as if you sat at your office, it would be difficult to someone else to use the aforementioned computer. You will be able to support that this apparatus is not yours and that whoever wishing to make use of it can do it, Si-Si! Of course, it is necessary to manage to make sign the purchase order. Still a year or two and everyone will have to it his, of the last model to the old woman babasse. And which will have it babasse? You.

-Organization. The key to success of a laboratory is its organization. The perhaps effective organization only accepted well by all the members of the laboratory. They is wholesale the clear definition of what it is possible to ask each individual of the group with the certainty of being able to obtain it. If nothing of such is defined for the whole of the laboratory, that can be it around a head of group, and with its exclusive service... Without organization, there remain to you two solutions. Either you negotiate an exchange of services in various form with the person who has competences which interest you, or you take time to acquire these competences. In this last case it should well be realized that you are likely to be with the retirement before to have published only one text. According to this principle it is sometimes easier make-to make something outside your laboratory than inside if no local organization is clearly defined. There are organizations of service. Most prestigious are the TGE (Very Large Instruments). Their organization rests on a scientific and technical personnel engaged on a clearly definite statute: 60% of their time must be devoted to deal with outsides whose proposals for experiments were accepted...

-Osmosis. Effective means to acquire a formation. In an exiguous room put a maximum of hardware (data-processing amongst other things) and all your thésards at work with some young already trained researchers. It will come out of there quickly of the remarkable results in fields where you do not have no need, you it direct (of thesis or other) to be qualified. Notice well that what interests a thésard in the highest point, it is that the problem on which it works at the moment is solved as soon as possible. He to propose to show him how to make while being based on another example that it his does not interest it, really not, you can test. What he wants well, it is that you explain to him how to make while solving his problem, thank you.

The phenomenon can play on all levels: to go to make a conference in the laboratory of a Nobel Prize is a clearly osmotic step of nature. The lecturer can be suspected of expecting a transmission of substance in a direction or the other. To be listened by a Nobel Prize is a rare pleasure. To listen to a Nobel Prize transforms you.


-academic Palms. Useful with mask and tuba to swim in academic world. You can finish large commander while leaving to the retirement. You will have to climb all the levels.

-Paranoia. If you believe yourselves persecuted, you are right. One day you can observe that somebody modified a software whose another person was the only one to be useful itself. The modification can make so that the program seems to launch out correctly but stops abruptly. Reason given by the modifior perhaps: he does not have to make this type of calculation on this machine, he disturbs everyone. If you keep silent yourselves, you can regard yourselves as accomplice. It is clear that the modifior made a filth with a researcher of higher level, if not the procedure had been more direct. Though it is, you must understand that you can rely only on yourself, and still...

-Parquet floor. There is not more much but an expression survived their disappearance: " to have the teeth which rayent the parquet floor ". See also ambition.

-Godfather. Small gatery that one makes you with your input at CNRS in addition to your director of search. It is a high level researcher of another laboratory, a personality indicated (but agreeing) to follow progress of search of the new researcher who you are and to inform the national committee of it. It is advisable that you put yourselves in contact with him as soon as possible, in order to inform it of the state of your work. The reports/ratios which must send annually your director of search and your godfather (on you) by no means do not exempt you to send a personal report/ratio to CNRS... This practice seems to fall in disuse, perhaps because of the maffieuses connotations of the term.

-Parricide. To progress, it is necessary to reject his father called in substance J D. Watson Co-découvreur of the structure in double helix of the ADN (Science, 261, 1812-13, 1993). He speaks about your second father, your reader . You must be ready to leave it and take risks. It is the code of conduct N°2 among the 4 principal ones which it gives to any researcher who wishes success in sciences. Others being: côtoyer only of high level people, to have a point of fall in the event of hard blow and anything to make which annoys you.

-Pianist. Under heard: " do not shoot at the pianist ". Man occupying an essential but voluntary station. Nothing obliges it with décarcasser for you like it does it. Then do not annoy it too much, because, you know, at the point where it is of its career (on the highest of course level), it could all let fall and devote to its garden once its not-voluntary tasks filled. A large share ofthe university organization rests on voluntary help, voluntariate,amateurism consequently, in the worst direction of the term.

-Piloting. All the backers want to hold the rudder, one day or the other. The research policy decides according to times' with the ministry for higher education and search, or with the ministry for search and industry, not always in exact agreement with the futurologies of CNRS or other organizations. Europe, the areas, the urban communities play a role growing with the height of the financial contributions. Only the broad outline of orientation can for the moment be given in public search: one influences by the number of researchers recruited in certain disciplines. Decentralization is an occasion rare to redeploy certain personnel of Island of France. For the remainder, once recruited, the researcher worthy of this name understands quickly that it can make some only at his head in his discipline. Pile up all that you will want on his desk, it can always say to you that it does not find the solution with the problems that you pose to him. The money does not make always large thing with the business. Innovating search can be carried out with obsolete hardware. An example, that of fullerenes: candle and lampblack...

Are the results of fundamental search better in the event of precise piloting by the node? Nothing is less sure. To create situations favorable to the birth of innovating ideas, here is only useful piloting, it must remain rather vague on the subjects.

-Plagiarism. The low general level of French in foreign languages is well known, the researchers do not make exception. It is English the language of predilection to publish a scientific article. With force of reading texts in this language, the researchers finish well by being usual jargon of their own specialities and manage to write their articles by joining of ends of sentences which they mend of Ci from there. They are not texts of great literary quality and the structure of the articles generally is very codified for the presentation of a given type of search. It is not rare that in these processing times of text computerized the researchers have at least part of the very ready text with white boxes where to insert the numerical values. The repetition of the use of a personal text is not any more of plagiarism (see redundant).

-Full-time. The researcher full time with life is a species which should not exist, to believe of them the teacher-researchers who are largely majority. The question is not put to know if teacher with life is a situation more favorable to the maintenance of the high awaited level of all the academics. Teacher-researcher with life is after all the worst since this profession permanently supposes to be excellent for these two functions at the same time.

-Weight. How much do you weigh? What really counts in the spirit of the appraisers? It is like everywhere: money and a number of people under your control. A number of contracts of more than 200KF with industry (except provision of services). A number of theses directed or Co-directed, since the beginning of your career, ten years, four years. For this reason you are inevitably thorough to crush your collégues: it must be them which support you and not the opposite. That which is shouldered is that which only signs the contracts, which directs, (pouah!). But of course, more question of team or group at the time of promotion. Did one already see a team promoted with the row of DR1/PR1 or DR0/PR0? Not to my knowledge.

-Policy. See piloting.

-Specific. Action missing width singularly. To direct a thesis, here of the serious one. To intervene punctually in the formation of the thésard here which is specific, even if this action is essential and makes possible the drafting of a chapter of its thesis. Morality: direct, act punctually, never.

-Pot of thesis. Occasion rare to spend healthily appropriations. Y outward journey even if the reader does not speak to you any more.

-Foal. Synonym of pupil particularly shining trained by a high level researcher. The accession with the row of foal will be facilitated in the event of attribution of a price or an unspecified medal.

-Premium. Carrot intended to encourage the personnelto engage in a rejecting famous action. The invented last were it by professors of university for themselves: premiums of doctoral framing, teaching, administration... Existed already: premiums of search, which one seeks or not...

With the date of invention of the last, decision makers CNRS do not follow: not " revalorization " of the function " researcher ". The full-time researchers who want to frame will frame (the premium free is substantial: 3000F/mois during 4 years for a professor of 1st Class, and which is essential if at the end of one year it does not frame any more). If they want the premium, they do not have which has to postulate with a passage in Higher education (other great dream of the Ministry of supervision)... Note well that CNRS is not directed exclusively by CNRS but that the teachers of the superior are in a majority there, imaginecurrent environment. A vague beginning of revolt in certain university laboratories occurred with the advertisement of the attribution of these premiums. Researchers CNRS being largely minority, fire died out, perhaps broods it... You will have evil to find a comment serious some share on this subject: curfew of the bodies of press of CNRS and academics, obséquieux silence of the trade unions, local smotherings of the threats of " strike of the framing ". The easy way it is that all " strike of the doctoral framing " condemns a researcher of CNRS in the more or less long term because the framing forms part of its missions implicitly and it is evaluated according to this criterion... Locally however, the brutal wage increase of the university readers having obtained the premium ( the contract ensures a new, model car low end Safrane, every 4 years with a professor of first class) could have for effect to cool enthusiasm associated with the discovery, the resolution of problems and the team work: the reader inevitably found himself a little more in private conversation with his thésard, which is not very favorable to the formation of this last.

-Principle. That of Peters is interesting but that of Moore marked academic search more these fifteen last years. Gordon Moore predicted that the number of transistors of the processors would double every 18 months. A direct consequence is that the number of publications of the high level researchers doubled every 4 years, notwithstanding the principle of Peters.

-Price. There are of them quantities, large and small, with or without savings. If many that it is well the devil if you do not have of it to you also a day or the other or if somebody in your entourage does not have of them one explicitly for work to which you took part. In this last case, be precise in your reports/ratios having for object your promotion: specify that such and such publication that you Co-signed form integral part of the work preceded of Mister Professor Untel... At least that you benefit from it a little you too.

-Progress. to give the table of period 59-81 and to make comparison by specifying the percentages of increase in the publicationS and to give the 3 principal reasons...

-Promotion. Lu some share under the title - Promotion DR2-DR1: " the DR2 having in theory all a high scientific level, one must know for their evaluation to make a right place with the various activities. The interest to see colleagues of quality being exerted with the various responsibilities (directions of laboratories for example) must be taken into account by the National Committee. " Detail for this particular case: the average age of passage DR2-DR1 for Chemical the Sciences section is 50 years 6 months. What does one advise you to make here? You noticed that the number of places of director available is weak (none in your laboratory if the station is provided). With the first access, this remark can seem odd. But if you have the spirit so much is not very Cartesian, you will realize instantaneously whom you do not have any more but two solutions to obtain this promotion. First is of briguer a post of director as soon as you see an advertisement of release of the aforesaid station some share (you can always wait, that never arrives). The second solution which must jump you to the eyes: become Caliph in the place of the Caliph. How to make? Not the choice, it must leave, it is still another obviousness. And do you believe thatit will leave if all goes well and in particular if you help it to make so that all is well? Not: if CNRS is content, it will take back the director in his functions and by doing this, CNRS will deprive itself of the interest to see you exerting you with the responsibilities for directions for laboratories (for example and to paraphrase). Good, at this stage of the reading, if you is it still there is that you have a solid feel humour, a little particular it is true. But seriously, it is too funny. Be appropriate that this essential criterion for your promotion is a " growth with the crime " not disguised. You have compri what it remains you to do, the whole in a spirit of healthy friendship of course, it' S more fun to compete, folks. But your teeth are perhaps not enough pointed for that, to hold the capacity is not your principal objective in the life, then remain DR2.

-Prophet. No one is not it in its country, the proverb is confirmed in search, an example: young student in 3rd cycle, you are frequently invited to orally express you (and hardly have the means of balking at this time there) on the status report of your search. Once high level you are still invited to given conferences but in 99% of the cases, the conference occurs outside your establishment. It is a little normal, your colleagues know already so much well what you ridges and in any case, you would on the spot be invited that you would refuse because you would fear that the public is not with go if not hostile.

-Futurologies. So still those of today for tomorrow were founded on the excellent results of the forecasts of yesterday for today. But at all. Our research policies forget that they are extasient in front of the economic potentialities which seem offered by projections that the policies of the vague preceding one had not known to foresee (and nobody besides). The projections of tomorrow are not in the futurologies of today. That it is said.

-Publication. Small building block being used for construction of a career, but only quality counts.


-Quality. One speaks about it but nobody dares too much to specify what it acts. One can reach a high level with the seniority or be recognized by already high level researchers. Once that one is on such a level, one is definitively good. Appropriations are affected for you without you having to claim them, quality is paid. The " seniors " of the University Institute of France, of recent creation, are the new elite. The " juniors " of this same institution must imperatively have less than 40 years. They are co-opted by the " seniors ", still a history of egg and hen which proves the existence of God, because are needed well fathers founders.

-Quantity. To have quantities of publications is not inevitably a sign of quality. To have any is however significant. Arbitrary quantitative indices can be defined. Here what that can give for the same laboratory as that already analyzed for the phenomenon of the interactionS between researchers. This table can appear unpleasing but its examination and its comprehension can render service and bring many satisfactions.

IND    N    T    A     B    C    D    E    F    G 
A     35  122  36.59  63   14   84   24    4   22 
B     25   81  23.32  44   28   35   18    0   18
C     24   84  24.56  37    7   40   37    1   17
D     24   38  13.09  10    5   18    5    0    6
E     23  150  38.85 114   20  108   22    2   10
F     23   81  22.42  57   17   17   47    0    8
G     19   13   3.77   2    2    2    9    0    0
H     12   31   7.89  21    8    7   16    0    5
I     12   16   4.73   2    7    0    9    0    0
    12   83  27.87  44   33   16   34    5   14
K     11   29   6.56  27   17    2   10    0    0
     9    9   2.83   4    0    5    4    0    0
M      8   35  12.38  24   24    2    9    5    2
N      8   12   3.66   8    6    0    6    0    1
O      7   28   8.18  25   13    6    9    2   10
P      6   14   4.33   2    0    3   11    0    0
Q      5   12   5.33   0   11    0    1    0    0
R      5    8   2.42   0    5    0    3    0    0
S      2   10   3.83   2   10    0    0    0    0
T      2    3   1.00   0    3    0    0    0    0
U      2    5   2.25   2    2    1    2    1    2
IND: Individual.
N: A number of years of presence in the list of the publications.
T: Numbers total publications in the list (possible not counted publications except list).
A: Summon number of the publications balanced by the number of joint authors.
B: A number of publications having as joint author a " outside " at the laboratory (or several).
C: A number of articles signed in first position.
D: A number of articles signed in last position or with the name preceded by and, und, or and.
E: A number of articles signed in " sandwich " (= T - (C + D)).
F: A number of articles signed only.
G: A number of articles signed only of the laboratory with an outside at least.

" the best " according to each criterion is underlined in fat. A classification compensated by N or T could indicate other " the best ". When at the national level 80 people dispute 2 stations, it is to be among 2 the best better. Extremely fortunately, the interpretation of excellence and the high level absolutely does not have any relationship with a simple quantification (us are said).

-Search of the recognition by the pars.


-Report/ratio. On this subject, here an article published recently in one of the Letters of the Departments of CNRS, at the heading Opinion column, and which relates to the management reports of the laboratories. Note that this text had been subjected to the " Newspaper of CNRS " and not to the Department in question, that no acknowledgement of delivery had been turned over to me, that I was not informed a transfer of the newspaper desired to the final support, nor moreover of acceptance to diffuse the text. Extremely fortunately what occurs after the sending from a text to a scientific periodical is not always also surprising. The title even of my paper not having been reproduced, I seized the occasion to deliver the plaintext for which the first editor did not ask me to yield the " rights of copy to him ". It is one of the rare definitions of alphabetical for which the text is with the first nobody:


A more precise definition of the mission and functions of the leaders as well as individuals, teams and laboratories seem to be a current concern at CNRS. A Guide of the Director of Laboratory is announced (the Newspaper of CNRS - October 1993); the chemists discovered in Letter N°42 of chemical Sciences (July 1992) two lists of recommendations to use of PURE and RUA on the one hand and the federations or departments of search on the other hand. Here an anecdote which could recall that the relevance of a recommendation appears only after use.

I was allured by article 10 of these recommendations to the RUA: "One of the means available to the laboratory to radiate outside its scientific community is the management report which must be produced every four years... An effort must be made so that this report/ratio can be read beyond the narrow group of the specialists...". I concluded from it thata fortiori these reports/ratios were at least to be able to be read by an unspecified member of the narrow group in question. I addressed some requests to directors of laboratories or to heads of notorious teams. I did not even receive an answer, was it negative. Which were my objectives? I did not make mystery of it. At one time whenthe evaluation makes rage it is suicidal to present itself to it without preparation. A preliminary car-evaluation is essential. For that one should not only have the criteria of evaluation but also of bench marks. How to estimate the performances of a laboratory, a team or an individual if not by comparison with those of the laboratories, teams or individuals in direct competition (not, the term is not too strong) on an international level.

Do you believe that an industrialist who would have the possibility of legally consulting the management reports of his competitors would not make use of it? Imagine the saving made by Volkswagen which can freely consult the files of General Motors. Of course, in the private field it is a Utopia. But does the individual lambda have really this possibility in public search, or well this information it is reserved to the initiates of the Commissions?

Having thus the feeling which recommendation N°10 was not very applicable just as it is, I suggested at my department the creation of a service which could ensure the systematic collection of these reports/ratios and their distribution on request whoever. Here the answer: "the laboratories have the administrative obligation to send their management reports every 4 years. The directors can answer positively or not the requests which are addressed to them as well as the researchers transmit or not their drawn to share. It is thus of the freedom and the responsibility for the directors of unit to answer your request.

I will point out here that 80% of my requests for drawn to share are satisfied, and that in any case, I always reach (in particular by the INIST) the documents which would be refused to me by their authors. Freedom of movement ofinformation is essential for public search, private search is not the last to benefit from it. It is true however that the researchers can proceed by omission by not providing all essential information in their articles. Stranger is the behavior of crystallographers who write "has list of structure factors is available from the authors", but remain quiet at any request. One can understand that they fear the publication of a corrective measure, but in what devil believe did that could serve this list, if not with a checking? Even in such a case, there is possibility of recourse: the gotten rid of applicant can address tothe editor. The final parade, it is when the editor himself does not answer you. One can thus finally admit that there is a parallel between the sending of drawn with share and the sending from reports/ratios of laboratory, but this parallel passes by the non-observance of the rule of the game, nonthe respect of " the writing given ". In the worst case, which is implicit in public search it is that all that you have writing could be retained against you.

Thus, certain laboratories seem to wish to radiate only in a selective way, outside their scientific community. It sometimes happened to me to dispatch the report/ratio of the URA (...) in response to various types of request forinformation, in particular for spontaneous candidatures for a post-doctoral stay. I did not always consider it necessary to warn the director of the moment of it. My colleagues in curiosity (...) can deduce from it that there is at least a person with the URA (...) interested by the totality of their work, ready to exchange a specimen of management report.

It is to be hoped that the guides are not transformed too quickly into codes or the recommendations in rules as long as the use will not have confirmed their validity, it is the morals of this history. At all events, one of the advertising slogans of the INIST is not it: "Reports/ratios, Communications, Conferences, ...All your writings interest Search", then, why not the reports/ratios of laboratories, the deposit is free.

Following the publication of this text, likely to pass between the hands of more than 3000 possible readers, only one volunteer for an exchange of report/ratio of laboratory declared himself. Either very few people read the official documents of CNRS, or they make fun about it. The fact Co-of having signed articles with an about sixty people of external laboratories does not create a link.

-Radiation. This word is included in the list of the criteria according to which the researchers are evaluated. With you to make a chapter " radiation " in your file with evidence with the support: a number of quotations of your work published, conferences invited...

-Search. Word which hides such a diversity that it is illusory to speak about it in general. A common point is that it brings into play the human relations to be carried out. According to his particular case, each individual has access to a quantity ofvariable information on operation inside his own laboratory and can have only one impression on outside. It is only its own history which one could tell, not always reluisante. Many things depend on the type of laboratory where you are, of it with what you were engaged at the beginning and of your degree of freedom of freedom of individual action! There is no general rule. The clearest demonstration of the absence of rule in search is obtained when one observes what arrives to a teacher-researcher when it ceases making search: nothing. The action " to cease making some " is however defined officially by the following consideration: " absence of publication during 4 years ".

-Recruitment. For all, all starts with a DEA and a thesis. But how? There still the situations are very variable. One could think that some 22 year old students finishing their control have precise personal projects. It is seldom the case. The student locating of him even a reader , proposer of itself a subject of study, that almost does not exist. And besides would it have the least chance to arrive there in this manner? Not, the things occur differently. The professors of universities and other " abilities to direct search " need thésards, their career depends on it like some additional incomes delivered in the form of premium on framing. Messrs the students, you are observed, located, selected by individuals who one day will make you a proposal that you will have of the evil to refuse: would not wish you to prepare a DEA, I undertake to frame you for the experimental part. Hear that this part is assured, the consequence is that it does not have any value at the time of the final classification of promotion. The attribution of the purse, without which to continue in thesis would be quite difficult for the average student, depends only on the performance to the theoretical examination. You will have six months to assimilate approximately 120 hours of program of " high level". It is necessary to finish in the group of head, the number of granted purses is more or less known in advance. The competition is certain... Organizations are enough powerful to have quotas of purses and recruit thésards after DEA (the ECA for example). They can thus blow you your customers, several times per annum of the advertisements appear in the interdisciplinary reviews most read as Search, Nature or Science. To keep a student shining, the future reader (the same one as the director of DEA if the student from does not go away) is ready with all. It is clear that what will attach you a student is your capacity to settle the question of the after-thesis: an employment. One can imagine the continuation: promises (firm but ever written) conditioned by the quality of your work to come, to obtain to you a function at the university, CNRS or in industry. Personal power and address book thus make wonders and the researchers of very high level collapse under the requests, it is besides one of the criteria of recognition. See also greeting.

Redundant. A problem which disappears if it were regarded as a negative factor by the appraisers (J D. Andrade, The Scientist, May 31, 1993). This author even proposes to point a finger in direction of the culprits by appointing " the author of more redundant of the year " in the fields of search more à.la.mode. It is true that it is in the hot fields that you are likely to succumb to the phenomenon: your high level is noticed more and more, therefore you are invited. You give conferences, but the texts of conference to international congresses are published more and more; at the same time are solicited you to write chapters of book and all that consumes your time, but finally they is all the same you who accept and in this direction you are guilty. Then it is true that it is not rare to find texts similar to 95% or more, same author. Small exercises: get you the two articles whose references follow and compare the word for word ones and appears in figure: Proc. R. Lond Ploughshare. To 442, 113-127, 1993 and J Non-Cryst. Solids, 156-8, 852-864, 1993; or, compare the figures of the four following articles: J MATER. Chem. 1, 113, 1991; J MATER. Chem. 1, 297, 1991, J MATER. Chem. 2, 383, 1992, Eur. J Solid State Inorg. Chem. 28, 397, 1991. Nothing to see with plagiarism. In the final analysis, if you always publish the same kind of work, by calling upon the same techniques, you will end up being guilty of duplication, an offence rather close to that of redundancy. Let us avoid hunting for the witches but that the appraisers remain vigilant, to start with themselves.

-Referee. Situation of that of which an Editor requires his opinion on the quality of a scientific article which is subjected to him, before final acceptance. A fable. If it arrives to you, as a referee, to specify (on a tone perhaps too caustic) that the omission of an essential test could explain obvious anomalies in the final result suggested by an article and that this article is published however thereafter without the least modification, you can decide to check by yourself that your suggestion was founded. That will not be easy because you will have to obtain authors their data source, but write don't "has list of structure factors is available from the authors"? After some adventures (to write to the editor because the authors do not answer you), made checking, you subject to the same review an indisputable corrective article. It will not be simple to make it accept! You will even have to explain why you wish to do it. Let us overlook a large share of the list of the successive stoppings which you will have to cross. Morality, it is less easy to correct a copy of high level professor than to correct a copy of student. It even seems that that is not completely deontologic.
With Internet, each cybernaut is promoted referee. Take part, do not hesitate to correct all that falls you on the screen if you have a criticism founded to formulate. Start by rectifying the alphabetical present which somewhat blackens the public image of the large academic research laboratories or well write the antithesis.

-Relation. Deplorable.

-Thanks. Personal addition frequently met in end of the scientific articles where are thanked the people who contributed (often it is specified in what) to the research task but are not among the joint authors. The day when the scientific articles will have credits like films, the things will be clearer than today. The appraisers can be interested in it more closely in an immediate future and one detects already an approach in this direction. Recent a entrefilet in the very serious review Search discussed an evaluation of the courtesy of the astronomers by the analysis of these thanks. A similar study was carried out in the case of the laboratory-test, only the thanks addressed to one of the members permanent of the laboratory were deducted. Only those which said thank you or which received a mercy are there.

Source: 39 publications, vintage 1992. Is read in direction X thanks Y.

        D  S  P  E  B  I  Q  C  O  M  J  F  L  U  T  Total
.   D                                    2             2 
    S                              1  1  1     1       4 
    P                                          2       2 
    E                                    1  1  1       3 
    B         1                    1  1  1     3       7 
    I                                 1                1 
  Q                                    2             2 
    C                                 1                1 
    O            1                    1     1  1       4 
    M            1                    1                2 
    J         1                          4     2       7 
    L                                    3             3 
    U                           1     1                2 
    T                                    1     1       2 
    Total     2  2              1  2  7 15  2 11
This table arise two qualities. On the whole vertical, is the hit parade of most obliging (because the most thanked). On the whole horizontal, is the hit parade of most courteous (thanking bus more). It will be noticed that the distribution of mercies is localised. The most thanked are those which are with the ordering of an equipment which is not in self-service. They are thus a passage obliged to carry out certain measurements. An implicit rule is that measurement is not search while the interpretation of the measurement added to the idea to make it (or make-make) in is. The pilot of the apparatus can be of a different opinion. He can treat with his suitability a request for measurement which is addressed to him.

-Renewal. Under heard contract of association which binds your laboratory to CNRS. With each renewal its procession of innovations and new rules. The shape of the files of renewal evolves to an increasingly precise definition of all the aspects. The evolution is subtle but doubtless considered, always towards a tighter control and a limitation of the individual autonomy of the researcher. The last time, there was a form where the research topics with their persons in charge for the four years to come were to be specified. Another form claimed the names of all the participants in this research program of and for the very first time, it was asked to sign opposite its name, because there was a box envisaged for this purpose... Imagine that you think that one probably asks you to mark, by this signature, your adhesion with the research program indicated to the preceding page. To obtain a signature is a well-known technique of engagement. However precisely, it is that you do not agree with the displayed program. Indeed, at the time of this contract of renewal do not remain any more but three topics and three persons in charge: a considerably reducing modification compared to the preceding situation (6 topics and 11 Co-persons in charge on the whole), but which besides continues (perhaps temporarily) to be displayed in the directory of the units and of the personnel of CNRS This modification had been the no dialogue object, except probably between the 3 persons in charge who car-had indicated themselves in full knowledge of cause. No complaint old other Co-persons in charge of topics (see flickering). You decide to refuse to sign. This refusal justifies a request for explanation on behalf of the rapporteur of the section of the national committee charged with the file, an explanation which you do not have any reason to refuse to him. In his opinion, this signature did not have any other direction but the simple paraph of the list of the members of the personnel. No the continuation, it will arrive to you nothing, but a priori, having stated not to work with the new program but with old, you will be the single recognized researcher of a phantom laboratory.

-Reserve. Is the duty of reserve exceeded in this work? All depends on the level of the author, It must be sufficiently high. Despite everything, to have the agreement of the hierarchy is desirable. An example of very high level: J Attali with Verbatim.

-Respect. There is not more, it is the effect of mass. The rank is not the function and it is necessary to fight for all: shortage of offices of appropriations... Of a new professor 30 years ago or more, it was waited until it melts a laboratory and appropriations were automatically allocated to him. The professors collect now with the shovel and one awaits anything any more them, they are equipped more automatically only with their wages. It is true that there are professor and professor, even university: of second class, of first or exceptional class. Then, you think, professor of college is not worth more anything either. The evolution of sciences and technology is so fast that the endowed beginners quickly know of it more about the innovations which count that the old ones a little tired to rehabilitate itself. It is the competence which is sizeable, does it remain about it really with all the high level researchers ? There remains to them their knowledge of the wheels of the system, their address book, a professorial capacity with speaking about all without knowing true.

-Person in charge. Word of recent origin in the field of search: appears in the reports/ratios of my own laboratory only as from 1983, and still only one person in charge is declared: the director. In the ratio of 1989 emerge without warning (in what relates to me) new persons in charge, one by research topic. It is clear that it is to be responsible for something better, that is now explicitly claimed by the commissions which examine your file at the time of a promotion. Boundless ingenuity is spent to be made declare or autodéclarer " responsible ". Only the aspect search is approached in this dictionary, which frankly limits the occasions to laugh at it, however the responsibilities are diluted at various levels also in search. The operation andthe organization of the laboratory provide the occasion to be expressed with a whole series of persons in charge established often in full sessions person in charge of gases, library,data processing, security... Certain stations are more interesting because they give you the control of significant appropriations for uses which interest you directly. Responsible once the local tradition can give you the right to only decide , even for engagements of the whole of the population of the laboratory. Person in charge of an official research topic of the laboratory: there that concerns the autodeclaration, bearable if somebody does not declare himself responsible for your activities, much less funny in the contrary case. See directory.

-human Resources. Which are it you?

-Reorganization. Bad synonym of " renaming of laboratory ".

-Summary-type. Official statement the 24/01/96, the new form says " summary-type " is designed to allow a " serious " comparison between the various candidates a promotion at CNRS Inter alia one claims there the " Principal projections carried out by the candidate these four last years (one will limit oneself to a sentence by projection considered as significant by the candidate) "; the number of publications, invited conferences, theses directed (...) since the beginning of your career, these 10 last years, these 4 last years (don't you weaken a little lately, dear candidate for a promotion? the total number of contracts (except provision of services) higher to 200KF, etc... Good, recapitulate, is the absence of contract higher to 200KF eliminatory this year? Of course, thus that makes us 90% of the eliminated candidates, which aubaine. Naturally, the contract must have only one signatory, the candidate. You want to say that it must have done the work alone? Lastly, at all, on the contrary let us see! Or had I the head. You do not think that this criterion goes against the objectives known as of " fundamental search " to CNRS? But if, precisely, it is necessary that that ceases! Dear candidates, if there are boxes or you feel ashamed of putting 0, you are wrong. A little courage, cease comprising you out of calf if not you will continue to be treated like calves. The advantage of the " summarize-type " it is that now you know exactly what to make to obtain dreamed promotion: exploit the sheep which surround you, engage them on your research projects. Still four years and you will be able to put crosses everywhere in the form.

-Meeting. With those where you are convened, you will be put in front of the accomplished facts. With the meetings restricted with the decision makers, it will be decided to put to you in front of the accomplished fact. Moreover the more significant the meeting is and the less one leaves you time to prepare it. For the display of a topic for enquiring recruitment, one convenes you the day before. The plays are already made. You knew, they are to it every 2 years that that occurs, you had time to prepare your personal project not? Your colleagues perhaps met without you a few weeks ago to remember to which it was the turn. But not it is not possible, you are delirious my friend.

-Broken. Anagram of " promoted " applying to the rejections (Quenet Report/ratio).

-Red. Post being able to be allotted in urgency to a foreign researcher for a post-doctorate. It perhaps reserved on simple phone call, provided that you are not no matter who.


-Wages. The head of company, it is the State, not the person in charge of SME of search where you work. There is in theory no possibility of dismissal according to the good pleasure of the local director of your company. Think that it is an enormous means of pressure which disappears. Note however that the attribution of certain premiums to the engineers, technicians and administrative depends on goodwill of the director. Also note that certain documents which give an account of your activity annually must be aimed, signed, annotated by the director...

-Powdering. The tendency is to avoid it when the appropriations are done rare. The equation is simple. Are X the appropriations and Y the number of researchers to be powdered. There is a threshold from which report/ratio X/Y is to be twisted laughter. The managers who do not like to be ridiculous decide to work with constant report/ratio X/Y. That wants to say that if X decreases or so Y increases, the consequence is that the basic researcher will see the appropriations only if he is a head of groupe/équipe, load to him to be ridiculous, because in any case he will not be able to avoid powdering, him. The concept of size critical is not without relationship with value X/Y. One will have included/understood, I am actually for powdering, but for a direct powdering: powder me, PLEASE.

-Signature. If you have it, all goes well for you (see also appropriations, equipment).

-Tender. Insinuation of an article or a proposal for an experiment (" proposal ") to a Very Large Instrument (TGE).

-Subcontracting. The high level researcher is overloaded at the point to need you to sub-contract certain tasks. It is the occasion to learn the trade. That considerations meanly materialists in connection with the premiums, for example, do not stop you. It is in any case a passage obliged bus in academic search, to be authorized to do something it is already necessary to have made this thing and to have proven it. To obtainthe accreditation to supervise resear , it is necessary already almost to have directed researchers. One can call that of control without licence, or led accompanied. At the time of the creation of the premium of framing, one of the criteria was that it was necessary to have framed two theses in the four previous years. You can withdraw a benefit of these specific actions by underlining them in your management report by a heading where you will announce the publications Co-signed by you who correspond to chapters of theses or reports/ratios of DEA of students and thésards with which you had interferences. With less than one prolonged absence of the reader , it is not very probable that none of these publications is signed by only two people.

-Defence. No relationship with the medium of the prostitution (see thesis). Nevertheless an analogy with this medium is possible by the means of the terms " tutor ", "reader ". The person in a state to be tutorisée, directed, of this fact is affublée of a guard who Co-will sign all his production... It is thus rare that a person under protection is contacted because of her competences. As much to pass through the guard, or nothing to make if one does not wish to find oneself with two people on the back for the price of one. See interaction. Exercise: two people work and four Co-sign the article, that did occur? Solution: two readers agreed so that the thésard one collaborates with the thésard of the other.

-Subject. There are two kinds of subjects of search: free or imposed, the search which you decide to make, that which one decides to do to you to make. With you to see (also greeting).

-Additional. A researcher impassioned or not sees on his registered payroll " calculated on the basis of 169h of work ". According to my calculations, if overtime were paid at the full price, as they are it for my colleagues teacher-researchers, I would be more at ease. The head office is rather delighted that the passion of the researchers the growth at this point, it is praised some sometimes. On the ground it is a little less funny, it is necessary for you to resist the sarcastic remarks those which make some the least possible and try to convince you that their way of acting is the maid.

-Trade unions. Curiously, the Commissions do not worry to transmit minutes of their meetings, the trade unions which have elected representatives there undertake some...


-Telephone. The note of the telephone could be used as criterion to detect the high level researchers, as well as the incorrigible chatterers.

-Time. It should be known that the time of the scientific researcher is taken more and more by the drafting and the development of the articles. Those which have difficulties in write a note are condemned. Most prolific are gaining.

-Thesis. Company seldom likely to fail. A very honourable mention is foreseeable, the jury adds you rather easily its congratulations. Think that the members of the jury generally agree to sit before to have read the thesis and sometimes that they sit without to have still read it.

-Stamp. There are of them at least two kinds in the laboratories, they are generally controlled by the secretariat and represent a considerable share of the operational budget. These stamps (postal and of request for photocopy of document to the INIST) are a possible means of pressure according to instructions' given to the secretariat by the direction. Any mail of your share or any request for document are suspect to be useless and to be able to pass by another circuit. A colleague, in front of the package of 22 letters which you wish poster today, can have an opinion different and " take on him " to recommend to the secretary to differ joining from the stamps until the return from the director from the laboratory for opinion. You do not believe in it? It is that, there was well for 61F60! Thank you, colleague.

-Drawer. The funds of drawer hide treasures: all that you could not solve but that you keep side because you do not lose hope to be able to solve one day. To have too many funds of drawers which you do not give up can lead you to an unproductive saturation. If you spend your time without success to réessayer constantly to find. To transmit a problem unsolved to somebody which one thinks that it will arrive there is not at all a current step nor easy because it is the disclosure of its failure and its incompetence.

-Toilets. It happens that they are transformed into office. Inform you, it is perhaps the case of the buildings which you occupy.

-Transfer. Of technology. With the fashion, the technopoles and the seedbeds of technology flower. SME and SME can make there carry out studies and measurements. The mechanism is interesting. One day, the researcher lambda learns in meeting that the Service of Technology transfer (STT) recently established in its university became " client ". In light, that wants to say that he is the privileged interlocutor of any applicant and must be able to transmit a request of provision of services to the laboratory which appears to him most adequate, this last is supposed to accept a priori. With the occasion, a pretence of organization can be set up in your laboratory to face there and of the plates describing the possible services are published. The diagram of the transfer is the following: passage by the STT which directs towards the director of the laboratory concerned which transmits to the person in charge for the type of measurement considered which passes the relay to the executant of measurement; interpretation of measurements if asked (it is more expensive) and if possible; either by the realizer of the measurement or by the person in charge of the type of measurement or by an unspecified expert; gone up of a report/ratio by all the intermediaries which possibly modify and add their salt grain. It will be understood that it happens that the executant and/or interprets measurement has by chance in hand the final document and notes that that has nothing any more but one distance relationship with its initial report/ratio. Before the appearance of these centers, the transfers existed, with much less intermediaries. If the center is equipped with the means of measurement and has its own experts, this former situation is found. The future is thus with the double probable equipment on a university, with competition between STT and the laboratories to obtain appropriations which, them, will not double. The thésards having a purse of industrial origin can make solve problems relating to their thesis by this way in a university laboratory without their name not appearing at any time in the request addressed to STT by a service research and development. The report/ratio can indeed appear like chapter of thesis. It is not any more formation with nor even by search, because all occurs in the absence from the thésard.

-Work. Who works for whom, which gives work to which? Great question. Work in question being search, a creative occupation by definition, which can say to which: create to me this or that or even something, anything? This is why the researchers all are " heads ", in theory. In practice, certain heads are more heads than the others and manage for example to make frame their thésards by others. In addition, there are no only researchers in the laboratory but also of the ITA (Engineers, Techniciens, Administratifs). This personnel can be in various situations, they are sometimes more numerous than the researchers in a laboratory, but generally fewer, in particular in the university laboratories. In this last case, their situation is uncomfortable because, ifthe organization of the laboratory is non-existent, they must face this army of Generals all loans to give them occupations for the 6 months to come. Most recent of the recruited engineers were formed with or by search and find themselves with equal diploma with the researchers who give them their list of tasks to be achieved. This situation perhaps all the more badly lived that the engineers would have possibly rather wished to obtain a post of researcher. Having supported a thesis, they put often already the finger in the gears of the system of publication and Co-signed articles, possibly in relatively great number (maximum 3 to 5 per annum during 3 years) if their speciality authorizes the exubérance. Their passage of the statute of thésard to that of engineer, compared with that of researcher obtained by some of their ex-colleagues in thesis, corresponds to a loss of autonomy. That can lead to an explosive environment of laboratory, the more so as the clients can be largely less qualified than the takers of command in the case of measurement as in the case of its interpretation.


-Waltz of the topics and the persons in charge. The heading even of the laboratory takes part in the saraband. All has a beginning and an end

-Vertical. Nature of a research topic worthy of official existence and thus of a person in charge. Be opposed to the horizontal topic whose repercussions are likely to sprinkle all the vertical topics. Work in a topic declared horizontal (development of method...), you will have problems to make it recognize, makes some you will be probably classified in the " common services ".

-Fish pond. The new teacher-researchers and researchers are fished there with the scoop by the persons in charge. There is waste. Exemptions authorize recruitments after the limit age, there is rescapés ex-waste. Some can return by far: unemployment possibly long duration in accordance with a doctorate of 3rd Cycle, expatriation so that finally you are found rather good for the service.

Return to the beginning  


My time of immersion (20 years) in the system of search is too short and the logic of many things escapes to me (this work is thus the fact of old beginning little with the current from realities and lack from pragmatism; the reader will forgive the subjacent naivety and the idealism). I had however the leisure to note an evolution. New entering tend to think that the working conditions always were in the state where they observe them and which if there were evolution, it is in the direction of more than democracy, of justice, it is not so sure. I support that prepares, for academic search, an evolution towards a rationalization and an unfavorable control of the objectives on the initiative individual and to the freedom of the researcher (public) to choose the object of his studies. The concern of making profitable the public money is a tempting pretext. But until there, it is its relative autonomy which distinguished the researcher from the public of that of private (like its wages). To want to cut down this autonomy (exorbitant and jalousée) is indeed to go towards the privatization of public search, it is to go towards the unique mould.

Return to the beginning  

To know some more

Some books or articles (most in french...) with the evocative titles, for some:

Bourdieu, P., Homo Academicus, Editions of Midnight, 1984.
Campanario, J Mr., Consolation for the Scientist: Sometimes it is Hard to Publish Papers that are later Highly-cited, Social Studies of Science, 23, 342, 1993.
Deheuvels, P., scientific search, University Presses of France, coll. What do I know? 1990.
Dermer, Mr. L, An insider' S guide to choosing has graduate adviser and research projects in laboratory sciences, Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 303-306, 1993.
Edward, J T, Be Cited gold Perish, Chemtech, pp 534-539, September 1992.
Friedberg, E, Capacity and the Rule, Threshold, 1993.
Friedel, J, Seed of Mandarin, Odile Jacob, 1994.
Gregory, Mr. W, The infectiousness of pompous prose, Nature 360, 11, 1992.
Grinnell, F, The scientific attitude, Second Edition, The Guilford Press, New York, 1992.
Joule, R.-V. & Beauvois, J.-L., Small treaty of handling for the use of the decent people, University Presses of Grenoble, 1987.
Lawrence, P.A. & Locke, Mr., the programmed asphyxiation of science, Search, 301, 31-32, 1997.
Husbands, B, seven deadly sins of the academics, Albin Michel, 1991.
Muzard, Mr., These large monkeys which direct us, Albin Michel, 1993.
Perec, G, Experimental demonstration of the tomatotopic organization in the soprano (Cantatrix sopranica L.).
Taubes, G, Measure for Measure in Science, Science, 269, 884, 1993.
Watson, J D., Succeeding in Science: Some Rules of Thumb, Science, 261, 1812, 1993.
Zuckerman, H., The Sociology of Science, CH 16 in the Handbook of Sociology, 1988.
Zuckerman, H., The Proliferation of Prizes: Nobel Complements and Nobel Surrogates in the reward system of science, Theoretical Medicine 13, 217, 1992.

And also :

The evaluation in the administration, University Presses of France, 1993.
Science have practice and culture, Edited by A. Pickering, The University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Science, capacity and money, Editions Differently, 1993.
With the search of the working time, in cheeses of the Republic, the Files of Duck, 85, 1993.
University search with the international ell, the World of the 9/7/92.
The rule of the university game, the world of the 10/7/92
Avriliennes publications, For Science 174, 10, 1992.

Return to the beginning  

A. Le Bail,
2, street of Gaspéri,
72100 Le Mans,

Return to the beginning

The author could not be held for person in charge of the consequences of the reading of this unhealthy document. He reserves the right to modify the text without notice ;-).