Leaving Scientific Director CML Arnold Tukker
The magic word is transparency, transparency, transparency
After his maximum term of 8 years, Arnold Tukker, Scientific Director of the Leiden Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML), on 1 September 2022 handed over the baton to Martina Vijver. How does he look back on this period and what will he do now?
How do you look back on the transition from TNO to a university?
A special experience. I already knew many CML staff well by 20 years of collaboration. They were happy I joined in 2013. But elsewhere you felt doubt about my appointment. I just had 50 publications at the time. After all, TNO does pay hardly any time for scientific publishing. It was actually a small miracle that those 50 papers were there! It didn't seem to count that I had already led pioneering work on sustainable business models and input-output models. Thanks to my work at CML, I now have 180 papers, I am a highly cited researcher, and I will soon receive an honorary doctorate – but the foundation for this had largely already been laid at TNO. At that time apparently you only really counted in the university world if you had brushed up some citation statistics. A bit weird, I thought. It is very good that the policy on 'Room for everybody’s talent' is now guiding human resource management at Dutch universities.
And what about becoming director of CML in Leiden?
That too was special. CML had gone through a difficult period a few years earlier. Significantly cut in direct funding, lost personnel through involuntary dismissal, and relatively small with 40-50 people. Fortunately, thanks to the skillful and careful management of my predecessor Geert de Snoo and the enormous commitment of the staff, there was again a team that had an excellent base. We were able to look ahead and build again.
How did you proceed from there?
What really helped in that phase was the recruitment of a good Institute Manager, Paul de Hoog, and an excellent professor for the Environmental biology group, Peter van Bodegom. And of course the commitment of the people in the institute again. We developed all kinds of initiatives. Acquired many new projects and recruited new PhDs. The Master Industrial Ecology has more than doubled in size. We set up a new Master Governance of Sustainability with the Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs (FGGA). And we have just received the green light from the Ministry for a Sustainability Bachelor that we are developing with the Faculty of Social Sciences and FGGA. As a result of all this, our budget and the number of employees grew rapidly, to more than 150 people and 9 million Euros now. We now have a very comparable size and profile to other institutes in the faculty.
How did you manage that growth?
The magic word is: transparency, transparency, transparency. You have to stand for that as a person and as a management team. But you also have to build it into structures. As a TNO employee, I was shocked that the university didn't have good systems to see what you earned the money with, and what you spent it on in terms of time use of staff. We had a Minor with 30 students and a 0.5 fte coordinator! The educational income had therefore already been spent on overheads before you had a teacher in front of the class. Yes, that way you automatically get a high workload. Creating capacity for teaching, PhD supervision and research must be the priority. You only create overhead if that makes the whole thing more efficient. We have made all that transparent. This way you could also see on a personal level where work pressure was too high and divide the work better. Or stop or arrange more efficiently those activities that really did not pay off.
You talk like an accountant Arnold! Is that all there is in science management?
No, people are the key! But there was almost nothing for HR either. And all those young people we hired deserve a transparent development perspective. You should not let that depend on the opinion of one supervisor. So our HR advisor Guido van Hooff developed an extensive HR review program with us. Our entire MT together looks at who is ready for the next step and why. And how we can help with that next step. You can't be consistent enough in that. Finally, I am convinced that servant leadership is the only form that works at universities. Don't manage top-down. Put yourself in the background a bit. Scientists have usually this enormous passion for that own, unique idea. So develop a framework and direction together. Make sure the people you hire in the basis have a collaborative attitude. And then let them have their way. Then fantastic things happen. Such as the PI that raises money for 4 PhDs, but already shared them it with 3 others during the set-up, since they could better supervise sub-subjects in the project. And we no longer only acquire projects via established people like myself. This is now happening thanks to the creativity, commitment and ideas of the entire scientific staff, from young to old.
So the crux is good organization, and not good science or good education?
No, that all requires attention. It is very nice to see how many steps CML has taken in this. Excellent researchers who now on a regular basis obtain personal grants and publish in top level journals. And about 4-5 people from our 40 academic staff won in the last 5 years a faculty or university education prize. Really amazing. When hiring, you simply should not make any concessions to quality. We have advertised some positions as many as three times.
So, CML is in good shape. Or can there still be improvement?
Of course you never get it fully right. For example, we thought that hiring new people on 6-year contracts and transparent evaluations for permanency would work well. But that often turned out to lead to uncertainty. It is hence so good that the Collective labor agreement now focuses on permanent appointments. And after such a period of quantitative and qualitative growth, it is good to start focusing on the latter. The fact that Martina takes over, with her track record of obtaining prestigious personal grants, fits perfectly with this.
What are you going to do now?
Actually, by managing a large environmental institute, I achieved what I wanted. I like jobs where you link management to content. Like many colleagues, I have been approached several times in the past year about a vacant dean position. But that's pure management. Not yet, I thought. My short-term step: I won a wonderful scholarship at the French Institute of Advanced Study. A bit less known as Princeton, but a much nicer place. Since September, ten months of scientific refreshment in the heart of Paris. With top scientists from all kind of disciplines. Philosophers, historians, linguists, computer scientists. Working interdisciplinary is a given here. But also: enriching fundamental scientific thinking. Very valuable for a field such as environmental sciences, which is still largely focused on solving practical problems.
Do you still keep a relationship with CML and Leiden?
Of course! I continue to supervise PhDs with all co-supervisors. I am director of the LDE Center for Sustainability and will continue to expand it with the team. And don't forget: the UN Environment Program and the OECD are located in Paris. Key players in the global circular economy agenda, in which CML and LDE CfS play such an important scientific role. The world famous group of Thomas Piketty is also around the corner. Colleague Rutger Hoekstra has just won an agenda-setting Horizon Europe project with them on well-being, inclusion and sustainability. It's nice to connect all those parties even more with CML and LDE. Then after 10 months back to Leiden again - a great prospect.