F.M. Cornford was a renowned classics professor at Cambridge University who lived from 1874 to 1943. He published famous works such as From Religion to Philosophy: A Study in the Origins of Western Speculation. I confess, however, that the only book of his that I have ever read is his short and extremely funny: Microcosmographia Academica, which is subtitled "Being a Guide For The Young Academic Politician." My father-in-law, who was the Provost at the University of California at Berkeley at the time, first told me about the book perhaps 32 years ago -- as soon as he discovered that I was embarking on academic career. More accurately, he grabbed the book and started read passages aloud to me. He is off doing other things now, notably developing Rockpile Vineyard out of nothing. But I can still remember him reading these sentences to me and then laughing like hell:
"I shall take it that you are in the first flush of ambition, and just beginning to make yourself disagreeable. You think (do you not?) that you have only to state a reasonable case, and people must listen to reason and act upon at once. It is just this conviction that makes you so unpleasant."
This statement, unfortunately, is just as true of academic politics now as it was when Cornford published it in 1908 in Microcosmographia Academica.
I just re-read Cornford for something I am writing. After a failed scramble to find my copy, I ordered an out-of-print version from Amazon. But it turns out that there was no need to spend the money, the entire little book is free right here.
As you will see, this little masterpiece is at once both a charming period piece and a largely accurate description of how organizational politics unfold in academia to this day -- and in a lot of other organizations as well. Cornford's advice for young organizational politicians is just as useful as what you can find in Pfeffer's Managing With Power, and will all due respect to Jeff, it is a lot funnier.
It doesn't take long to read the book, but I can't resist reprinting a several of my favorite passages:
A Caucus is like a mouse-trap; when you are outside you want to get in; and when you are inside the mere sight of the other mice makes you want to get out.
Political influence may be acquired in exactly the same way as the gout; indeed, the two ends ought to be pursued concurrently. The method is to sit tight and drink port wine.
The Principle of the Wedge is that you should not act justly now for fear of raising expectations that you may act still more justly in the future -- expectations which you are afraid you will not have the courage to satisfy. A little reflection will make it evident that the Wedge argument implies the admission that the persons who use it cannot prove that the action is not just. If they could, that would be the sole and sufficient reason for not doing it, and this argument would be superfluous.
The Principle of the Dangerous Precedent is that you should not now do an admittedly right action for fear you, or your equally timid successors, should not have the courage to do right in some future case, which, ex hypothesi, is essentially different, but superficially resembles the present one. Every public action which is not customary, either is wrong, or, if it is right, is a dangerous precedent. It follows that nothing should ever be done for the first time.
When other methods of obstruction fail, you should have recourse to Wasting Time; for, although it is recognised in academic circles that time in general is of no value, considerable importance is attached to tea-time, and by deferring this, you may exasperate any body of men to the point of voting against anything. The simplest method is Boring. Talk slowly and indistinctly, at a little distance from the point. No academic person is ever voted into the chair until he has reached an age at which he has forgotten the meaning of the word 'irrelevant'; and you will be allowed to go on, until everyone in the room will vote with you sooner than hear your voice another minute. Then you should move for adjournment. Motions for adjournment, made less than fifteen minutes before tea-time or at any subsequent moment, are always carried
I especially love this last one, as although we live in a world where there is so much pressure and apparent reward for being engaging and inducing excitement, Cornford's point -- that being deadly boring is a useful tactic -- is a delightful counterpoint. As he says, being boring is a great way to obstruct change. I have also seen it used to great effect by a smart administrator to calm a group of upset faculty members (I was one of them). Our anger evaporated because the long rambling talk was so boring that it took all the energy we had just to stay awake. I thought that this particular administrator was simply a boring speaker as this was the first time I ever saw him -- I only realized it was a brilliant political tactic a couple years later when I saw him give a charming speech that had the audience roaring with laughter throughout.
And, yes, motions for adjournment are always popular. Indeed, I can think of a few especially popular faculty at Stanford who don't usually say much at meetings, but are quick on the draw with motions for adjournment. One of my favorite lines, which I heard years ago, was "It is 1:30 and I believe it is time to declare victory."
Enjoy.
Bob - if you've wondered why business creates so many messes let me assure you political dysfunction is not restricted to academics. The number of critical strategic decisions that were "won" by the division/executive with the most clout rather than the most logic, and the resultant terrible consequences for many thousands or more, should astound you. Sadly they will likely not.
To that end I've always found Niccolo's "Prince" to be a great tactical manual and his "Discourse on the Republic" to be the perfect strategic bookend. An interesting conceptual framework is Mancur Olson's "Power and Prosperity" and my own feeble attempts to capture and employ the insights to analyzing political change strategies are encapsulated here: Changes and Challenges: a New Year Unlike Most Others (http://tinyurl.com/72ddnm )
Posted by: dblwyo | January 07, 2009 at 10:30 PM
Bob - if you've wondered why business creates so many messes let me assure you political dysfunction is not restricted to academics. The number of critical strategic decisions that were "won" by the division/executive with the most clout rather than the most logic, and the resultant terrible consequences for many thousands or more, should astound you. Sadly they will likely not.
To that end I've always found Niccolo's "Prince" to be a great tactical manual and his "Discourse on the Republic" to be the perfect strategic bookend. An interesting conceptual framework is Mancur Olson's "Power and Prosperity" and my own feeble attempts to capture and employ the insights to analyzing political change strategies are encapsulated here: Changes and Challenges: a New Year Unlike Most Others (http://tinyurl.com/72ddnm ).
Posted by: dblwyo | January 07, 2009 at 10:30 PM
Bob--having some experience in reading Pfeffer and you (and the two of you in collaboration), I find it easy to conclude that Pfeffer's insights are worthy of study, and his comedic talents, in comparison, allow you to seem as if funny.
Thankfully, the two of you work so well in your collaborative efforts, as well as creating thought-provoking works independently, that I still read you both, and will continue to do so!
Posted by: Rick | December 16, 2008 at 04:38 AM