RCVS JVP bullying allegations

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

grumpyoldman — Thu, 18 Mar 2021 10:08:08 GMT

The apparent research cheating is deplorable particularly if its bad science leaks into the real world .. IF that can be proven beyond reasonable doubt then it needs acting upon.

The Academic world does attract some very focused and driven people. Its likely they do not suffer fools or less committed people lightly. Personal abuse is however unacceptable ,should not be tolerated anywhere ,sometimes in the heat of the moment you can loose your mind for a second. Depends on the provocation.

On Tuesday this week an ACA , decided to dunk my electric drill post TPLO. It will cost £250 to get it serviced and I had to put off 2 surgeries for a week . I just looked at the woman and said " what the F*** are you ? some kind of doomsday machine ". Sometimes it just slips out, its just a reaction to a mishap ,its not bullying persecution etc you are just angry with a dysfunctional situation. Then you calm down and just say sorry never mind we will get it fixed and please don't do that again .

It maybe that in Edinburgh people don't calm down and do not express remorse if they upset someone ?.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Bob Russell — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:50:58 GMT

Without knowing the PIC details it is hard to comment. I believe that anyone has the right to privacy up to and including the PIC stage. If no case is found perhaps the 'accused' should have the final decision over release of details or not. It may be the case already.

I am not going to go down the route of no smoke, no fire. I will therefore consider no case proved and no action required.

I have no doubt there are other forms of action available should anyone feel hard done by.

We trust our disciplinary body if it clears someone and should question it where guilt is found. Justice in action.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Coopers Wamae — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:38:46 GMT

Finally this is how it ended for Professor David. Do you believe it was the right thing to do?

www.vetsurgeon.org/.../professor-david-argyle-resigns-from-rcvs-council-as-pic-concludes-no-further-action

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 10:39:29 GMT

[quote userid="8858" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227964#227964"] It seems unlikely half a department of some of our finest minds could suffer from some kind of contagion of underperformance. [/quote]

Or, if they were indeed underperforming, it was 'managed' very badly indeed if it left them all feeling like their issues were all their own fault and that they had no other option than to leave. This in itself indicated poor leadership.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 23:11:41 GMT

[quote userid="8991" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227965#227965"]Add into that what is a bully? What is bullying? How is it different to being forthright? Different to harassment? It's surely in some way a relative concept, and depends very much on someone's perception, which is rarely (if ever) objective. It is also an emotive word, and for someone disgruntled, will carry some weight with their employers.[/quote]

Quite so. "Bullying" has been used so long as a colloquial metaphor for forthright issuing of orders, carpeting, tongue-lashing, and so on, that its real meaning has been (rather conveniently) forgotten. Bullying means picking on someone weaker than you (be it physically weaker, or in a junior rank, or whatever) and making them suffer, just for the sake of it rather than to achieve what you are supposed to achieve. It may not be in as extreme a form as illustrated by Kipling in "The Moral Reformers" but I'd recommend that story if you are unclear.

"Bullying" has become a fashionable, nay, trendy complaint (along with one or two other things, like...well, let's not go into that ) that is very easy to level at someone in charge of you whose approach you dislike. And making your complaint one of "bullying" immediately, through the black magic of fashionable concerns, immediately gets bias on your side.

Getting a metaphorical boot up the a*** for poor performance is not being bullied. By all means complain about your superior being unnecessarily offensive when telling you off, or too overbearing, or not listening to your defence, or otherwise just demonstrating poor man management, but don't call it "bullying".

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

David Mills — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:20:38 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227956#227956"]domineering or patriarchal or bullying figure in the captain's seat lead to a situation where everyone was too scared to challenge his opinion or mistakes or whatever[/quote]

Yes, I think there's a sweet spot to be found where people are not afraid to challenge those in authority/higher in the hierarchy/management and the latter having to explain every single decision they take in the spirit of 'openness'. There has to be mutual trust on both sides, and that can be tested when changes are brought in which people don't necessarily agree with or actions are taken that people don't agree with (on the surface that is).

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227956#227956"]just because people hold beliefs, that does not make them right.[/quote]

Beliefs are very strong drivers of behaviour, which can be both a blessing and a curse. Because these beliefs can be wrong and confused with knowledge. In classic epistemology, knowledge is justified true belief (whatever 'justified' or 'true' means) - belief itself is not knowledge but people often confuse it with such. Changing people's behaviours is a complex process, and different people (according to personality types if you buy into that theory) require different methods to change behaviour. If you think you may have a smattering of different personality types across a workplace, each may require slightly different strategies - it quickly becomes a huge task. Add into that managers are generally not always au fait with modern cognitive psychology, new ways of doing things (perhaps), a new personality in charge (may be completely different from the last, possibly with new focus) and it can all become very messy.

Belief also colours perception e.g. I don't read the Guardian or e.g.

[quote userid="8858" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227964#227964"]The whole point about being one of the old white boys is that you can't see a problem with it.[/quote]

(Not sure what 'white' is doing here in the context of this discussion. Interestingly, did you see the case of the 50 year old white man who was refused a job (despite being the best qualified candidate) in the NHS of all places as the panel said he wouldn't fit in with the workforce of mainly 30-something women?) and as perception is one of our primary methods of acquiring knowledge, our belief about someone (e.g. the way they act, talk, come across, even look, what others have said about them) may bias our perception of what they are saying - cognitive bias. Add into that what is a bully? What is bullying? How is it different to being forthright? Different to harassment? It's surely in some way a relative concept, and depends very much on someone's perception, which is rarely (if ever) objective. It is also an emotive word, and for someone disgruntled, will carry some weight with their employers.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227956#227956"]There seems to be this idea that you need someone obnoxious as a leader if you want to get things done. [/quote]

I think it's a case of personality of the employees. For you, loving and respecting someone worked, but for others they may see them as 'weak' or 'fluffy' (even thought they may not be) and not perform well for someone like that. Different horses etc.

I have no idea whether bullying occurred in this instance, it may well have done. But, as per that article and this:

[quote userid="8858" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227964#227964"]It seems unlikely half a department of some of our finest minds could suffer from some kind of contagion of underperformance. [/quote]

We just don't know! We don't know the context of his appointment, the department, the finances, whether the previous incumbent was good/bad/indifferent. They are all important.

Jill - I'm sure if you were accused of something like this you would want all mitigating circumstances considered, for your side to be heard, and not be trialled purely on the suspicion and logical fallacy of 'no smoke without fire'. Lastly, I'm sure you would be horrified if someone dismissed your complaint as a disgruntled old white woman getting emotional about things - no different to somehow making this about 'old white boys'. How does such denigration help?

As for the RCVS involvement, it is pertinent to consider that if you are going to step into to something like this, it is always helpful if you have a history of integrity and carrying out similar investigations well and fairly. I think we only need to look on this forum for recent activities where it appears this hasn't necessarily been the case, according to the testimony provided. Part of the issue of course is keeping things confidential, but in whistleblowing incidents, there can be little option as people can be sometimes readily identified.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Jill Butterworth — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:56:02 GMT

The whole point about being one of the old white boys is that you can't see a problem with it. It's under your radar because of the 'strong' person you are, it doesn't mean it isn't there. What is unacceptable is gradually being called out but this is a slow process. Bullying and mental health are interlinked and feed each other, so it's easy to point the finger and say someone is not up to the job and be oblivious to endemic causes. It seems unlikely half a department of some of our finest minds could suffer from some kind of contagion of underperformance.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:49:02 GMT

[quote userid="8991" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227954#227954"]I don't see how that transcribes necessarily to bullying[/quote]

Nor did I, actually. Although on reflection, I think back to my days as a pilot, and a number of notable crashes (not with me at the helm, I hasten to say), where the behaviour of a domineering or patriarchal or bullying figure in the captain's seat lead to a situation where everyone was too scared to challenge his opinion or mistakes or whatever, consequently, er ... boom. I would imagine that the same is true in research. Presumably a good researcher is someone who listens to and explores opinions, not someone everyone either dislikes or is scared of.

[quote userid="8991" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227954#227954"]The no smoke without fire is classic bandwagon fallacy in that "this many people can't be wrong" (20-30 faculty members).[/quote]

Yes, good point. Whenever I think of something which people believe just because someone else or lots of people said so, I think of 'homeopathy' So thank you for quite rightly hauling me up on that one.

Yes of course, just because people hold beliefs, that does not make them right. So I do not think you can say that someone is something as subjective as 'a bully' just because a number of people say so.

BUT ... if you see a substantial number of people saying they find someone's behaviour obnoxious, it tells you one thing for sure, which is that they are widely disliked. That then beggars the question as to whether someone who is widely disliked is suitable for public office.

There seems to be this idea that you need someone obnoxious as a leader if you want to get things done. I think that is a bit of a fallacy. The people I have worked hardest for in my lifetime were people I did so out of respect or out of, well, love actually!

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

David Mills — Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:12:56 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations"]Just stumbled upon this article published a few weeks ago: https://forbetterscience.com/2021/01/04/david-argyle-can-bullying-lead-to-bad-science/ [/quote]

I think you have to be very careful with articles like this, self-published essentially and one point of view with very selective quotes and viewpoints. There is also a lot of mudslinging in the unproven and conjecture that he has been faking or doctoring results (in papers where he was named as last author) based on a few selected images; I don't see how that transcribes necessarily to bullying; as if some element of bullies also make them dishonest is a classic false cause fallacy, unexamined in this opinion piece.

The no smoke without fire is classic bandwagon fallacy in that "this many people can't be wrong" (20-30 faculty members). Lots of people hold beliefs about things that are, ultimately, wrong. We don't know what his remit was when taking over - maybe the vet school was tanking clinically, maybe he was sent in there to specifically shake things up and make changes and there would inevitably be people (as there always are) who disagree with these changes, especially if there was a step change from a previous manager. You can't please everyone, and if the vet school was tanking, the incumbents would have been ignorant (wilfully or otherwise) of their part in that - people rarely want to admit to their mistakes or underperformance, and vets especially (type A personalities a lot of the time, possibly more so in academia) don't always take well to certain criticisms. That is an equally valid alternative viewpoint; I have no idea whether it is true or not.

Then throw in employer-employee relationships, whether we know the total number of people employed by U of E, the reasons these people left (were they underperforming?) etc etc etc and it can be easy - very easy - to throw an accusation at someone just because you don't like what they're saying and to avoid critical analysis of your own behaviour. The B word is an easy one to use as it is so subjective; as we saw through the mock-shock-horror of the left press with Pritti Patel recently, one person's bully is another's strong leader. Anyone making changes anywhere is unlikely to be popular with everyone.

Or, he may well be a harassing bully. The important thing is we don't know and some mediocre one-sided article doesn't throw any light on the situation; far from it.

I've met David Argyle once, many years ago, and he was a driven, no nonsense individual (I was considering a PhD in his research group); I found him refreshing and straight talking, not something you always see in academia, and actually something I was glad of at the time. One of his managers, Richard Mellanby, has done quite a bit of work on mental health in the profession.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Bob Russell — Tue, 19 Jan 2021 16:30:04 GMT

Don't get me wrong, I cannot see how 20+ complainants can fail to ring a lot of warning bells. It is frightening just how easy it is to start witch hunts though.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:29:39 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29608/rcvs-jvp-bullying-allegations/227950#227950"]I do worry that the move to discredit him can become bullying in itself.[/quote]

Yes, I agree, that is the risk, and why I hate the 'no smoke' position. But jeepers, there's a lot of smoke hanging in the air.

RE: RCVS JVP bullying allegations

Bob Russell — Tue, 19 Jan 2021 12:53:25 GMT

Interesting to read the bit about taking credit for the work of those working under you.

Many decades ago my fathers boss received a knighthood largely based on work my father did! His work was much more respected in the US and behind what was then the Iron curtain. It was only family ties that prevented us all moving to the States in the early 70's.

I cannot comment on Prof Argyle as I have never encountered him. I do worry that the move to discredit him can become bullying in itself. Same concerns with the 'Me Too' and even 'Black Lives Matter' campaigns. It is a shame that the investigation by the U of Edinburgh was not seen as being independent.