Start at the University of Amsterdam
At the University of Amsterdam (UvA) a heavy fight had taken place about the decision power of the different sections in the organization. The final decision had been that all members in all decisions making bodies had one vote and decisions should be made by majority of votes. This rule also applied in the Methods department of the Political Science Faculty of the UvA. This department consisted of 3 associate professors, 2 assistant professors, one mathematician teaching first year statistics, 1 programmer, 5 student assistants and a secretary. All 13 people had one vote in the decsions. After Professor Mokken had left, this group had organized the teaching and research of the department during 3 years. In 1983 I entered this department with 2 reseachers which also would have a vote if decisions had to be made.
In the past the associate professors had made publications together with Frans Stokman and Rob Mokken but not more than 5. During the last 8 years very little was published. The main visible activity had been the Dutch election studies, which they had organized with political scientists of other faculties while the department of the UvA had generated the cleaned data sets and related codebooks. This was very valuable work but did not lead to publications. Two members of the department, Van der Eijk and Niemöller, were preparing their joint dissertation for later that year.
Given the discussions that had taken place before my appointment as professor, I could expect some problems but I hoped to be able to start in a pleasant way. As professor in the department, it was still logical that I would chair the meetings. On the other hand the democratization of the university meant that all members of the department had one vote, if it was necessary to vote. At the Free University there was also democracy but there we hardly ever voted. We discussed issues and people got the freedom to do what they wanted if it did not harm others. This was not the case in this department.
In the past the associate professors had made publications together with Frans Stokman and Rob Mokken but not more than 5. During the last 8 years very little was published. The main visible activity had been the Dutch election studies, which they had organized with political scientists of other faculties while the department of the UvA had generated the cleaned data sets and related codebooks. This was very valuable work but did not lead to publications. Two members of the department, Van der Eijk and Niemöller, were preparing their joint dissertation for later that year.
Given the discussions that had taken place before my appointment as professor, I could expect some problems but I hoped to be able to start in a pleasant way. As professor in the department, it was still logical that I would chair the meetings. On the other hand the democratization of the university meant that all members of the department had one vote, if it was necessary to vote. At the Free University there was also democracy but there we hardly ever voted. We discussed issues and people got the freedom to do what they wanted if it did not harm others. This was not the case in this department.
An effort for cooperation
With respect to research we decided that the interest in research was quite similarly directed to political choice behavior. This general title could include: election studies (Van de Eijk and Niemöller), formal models (De Bruin), argumentation of politicians (Irmtraud) and questionnaire design (Van Doorn and me). The only topic that was clearly rejected was computer assisted data collection, because the programmer boldly said that he would not program for the microcomputers. I accepted this immediately, because he was a very unpleasant person and I expected that I could ask Marius de Pijper from de other university for support if needed.
Organizing teaching led to more problems. First of all I still had an obligation to teach at the other university in the second semester of the course of 1982/83 because of the late decision about my position. So I would start my teaching in the third semester of that year. I suggested to teach on questionnaire design and that was accepted. Because I was clearly the expert in teaching Structural Equation Models (SEM), I proposed to teach that course in the second semester of the course of 1983/84. Also this proposal was accepted. The other tasks were divided as usual.
With respect to research we decided that the interest in research was quite similarly directed to political choice behavior. This general title could include: election studies (Van de Eijk and Niemöller), formal models (De Bruin), argumentation of politicians (Irmtraud) and questionnaire design (Van Doorn and me). The only topic that was clearly rejected was computer assisted data collection, because the programmer boldly said that he would not program for the microcomputers. I accepted this immediately, because he was a very unpleasant person and I expected that I could ask Marius de Pijper from de other university for support if needed.
Organizing teaching led to more problems. First of all I still had an obligation to teach at the other university in the second semester of the course of 1982/83 because of the late decision about my position. So I would start my teaching in the third semester of that year. I suggested to teach on questionnaire design and that was accepted. Because I was clearly the expert in teaching Structural Equation Models (SEM), I proposed to teach that course in the second semester of the course of 1983/84. Also this proposal was accepted. The other tasks were divided as usual.
The textbook for the class
The textbook I had prepared for the SEM course at the VU and my yearly course in Essex was now so complete and so well evaluated by the students that I thought to make a book out of it, because such an introductory textbook did not exist yet. As the text was in English I asked the British publisher Allen and Unwin if they were interested in publishing the book. When they confirmed that they were interested, I prepared with Henk Stronkhorst the version to be published and sent it to them.
The textbook I had prepared for the SEM course at the VU and my yearly course in Essex was now so complete and so well evaluated by the students that I thought to make a book out of it, because such an introductory textbook did not exist yet. As the text was in English I asked the British publisher Allen and Unwin if they were interested in publishing the book. When they confirmed that they were interested, I prepared with Henk Stronkhorst the version to be published and sent it to them.
When I asked how much the book would cost, they answered that the sale´s price would be 130 guilders. This came as a shock because it was a book for students and they certainly could not pay such a price for a text book. Then we decided to produce the book ourselves for a price that they could afford (10-15 guilders). That meant that we had to make the layout ourselves. My assistants for the course, Kees Aarts and Leo van Doorn, were doing this work on the terminals of the mainframe computers. The programmer regularly barked at them because of the use of these terminals for this work. Therefore we called him the “programmer-dog”.
The first scrimmages
During this work the “programmer dog” continued to make problems to the two persons editing the book. He even informed the university newsletter about “the illegal use of the computer for private purposes by a professor”. He was not accustomed that professors were writing books. The board of the UvA, as a reaction to a letter of me, mentioned the same, namely that professors have the right to use the tools of the university to publish their work. This was just a first action against me by a member of the department.
During this work the “programmer dog” continued to make problems to the two persons editing the book. He even informed the university newsletter about “the illegal use of the computer for private purposes by a professor”. He was not accustomed that professors were writing books. The board of the UvA, as a reaction to a letter of me, mentioned the same, namely that professors have the right to use the tools of the university to publish their work. This was just a first action against me by a member of the department.
Having a break
To prepare for the future Irmtraud and I had rent for the month of May a former chapel rebuilt in a house in Tuscany. There in a quiet and pleasant surrounding without barking dogs I checked the texts which Kees and Leo prepared. In order to speed up the process and to make it attractive for them, we invited them to come to this place and stay a couple of days till I had checked the texts they had made. Then they went back to make the corrections and start at a new part. It was a beautiful place. Irmtraud did sightseeing with them in the surroundings while I checked the texts. Together we also went at a restaurant next to a castle at the top of a hill surrounded by an old town. In this pleasant surrounding we got prepared for the next storm.
To prepare for the future Irmtraud and I had rent for the month of May a former chapel rebuilt in a house in Tuscany. There in a quiet and pleasant surrounding without barking dogs I checked the texts which Kees and Leo prepared. In order to speed up the process and to make it attractive for them, we invited them to come to this place and stay a couple of days till I had checked the texts they had made. Then they went back to make the corrections and start at a new part. It was a beautiful place. Irmtraud did sightseeing with them in the surroundings while I checked the texts. Together we also went at a restaurant next to a castle at the top of a hill surrounded by an old town. In this pleasant surrounding we got prepared for the next storm.
1984, "Democracy at work"
There was one member of the department who thought that he could take over my position, if he was able to get rid of me. So he made all kinds of proposals which I would disagree with and asked for a vote of the department and if I refused to accept the proposal I was of course undemocratic and that would be a reason for a dismissal.
For the teaching of the next year he suggested that everybody should do another course. According to the department's rule all asociate professors should be able to teach any of the courses. For example, while I was clearly an expert in SEM models, somebody who never had written a word about this had to give this course.
At another occasion there were two places vacant for research assistants. I needed desperately an assistant for my own research, given the workload I had which was equal to theirs, but I also had to guide 6 PhD students and was member of several commissions for PhD theses. The two research assistants went to my strongest opponent and to a group of students.
At some point in time, the day before I was planning to leave for holidays, I received the task to evaluate 60 first year exams "because nobody else could do it". I asked around and there were two more staff members who were willing to take over part of the task. I did 30 of them and they did the other ones.
I made an application for a new research project to be sent to the Dutch Science Foundation. The members of the department told me that I had to ask for approval from the department whether this proposal should be handed in. So there was a vote about the proposal and the majority was against sending this proposal to the Science Foundation.
There was one member of the department who thought that he could take over my position, if he was able to get rid of me. So he made all kinds of proposals which I would disagree with and asked for a vote of the department and if I refused to accept the proposal I was of course undemocratic and that would be a reason for a dismissal.
For the teaching of the next year he suggested that everybody should do another course. According to the department's rule all asociate professors should be able to teach any of the courses. For example, while I was clearly an expert in SEM models, somebody who never had written a word about this had to give this course.
At another occasion there were two places vacant for research assistants. I needed desperately an assistant for my own research, given the workload I had which was equal to theirs, but I also had to guide 6 PhD students and was member of several commissions for PhD theses. The two research assistants went to my strongest opponent and to a group of students.
At some point in time, the day before I was planning to leave for holidays, I received the task to evaluate 60 first year exams "because nobody else could do it". I asked around and there were two more staff members who were willing to take over part of the task. I did 30 of them and they did the other ones.
I made an application for a new research project to be sent to the Dutch Science Foundation. The members of the department told me that I had to ask for approval from the department whether this proposal should be handed in. So there was a vote about the proposal and the majority was against sending this proposal to the Science Foundation.
Now it was enough
Already during the year 1984 it became clear to me that I didn´t want to continue in this way under supervision of the department. Therefore I told them that I did not want to be responsible anymore for the decisions of the department and handed my position as chairman of the department over to whoever would be willing to take over this task.
The reaction was that they said that the professor had the task to conduct assessment interviews with the people working "under him" and the promotion of staff members.
I asked them If they thought that this was the only task of a professor? Should I be responsible for these evaluations, if I had no influence on the research and teaching they were doing? This question has never been answered and it is not clear to me until now.
Already during the year 1984 it became clear to me that I didn´t want to continue in this way under supervision of the department. Therefore I told them that I did not want to be responsible anymore for the decisions of the department and handed my position as chairman of the department over to whoever would be willing to take over this task.
The reaction was that they said that the professor had the task to conduct assessment interviews with the people working "under him" and the promotion of staff members.
I asked them If they thought that this was the only task of a professor? Should I be responsible for these evaluations, if I had no influence on the research and teaching they were doing? This question has never been answered and it is not clear to me until now.
How further?
One thing was clear to me: at the UvA I could not realize the research I wanted to do. I could start a formal battle against all these decisions but I didn´t want to spend all my time on this. That meant that I had to organize something outside the university. I made this decision already after one and a half year working in this department of the University of Amsterdam. It did not mean that I was planning to leave the university. I would continue to teach as I had been doing before but for research I did not see possibilities within the department. That had to be organized outside the university. I also planned to study more at home than at the faculty. I would be there only when it was necessary.
I was not happy with this decision but I did not see any other possibility.
One thing was clear to me: at the UvA I could not realize the research I wanted to do. I could start a formal battle against all these decisions but I didn´t want to spend all my time on this. That meant that I had to organize something outside the university. I made this decision already after one and a half year working in this department of the University of Amsterdam. It did not mean that I was planning to leave the university. I would continue to teach as I had been doing before but for research I did not see possibilities within the department. That had to be organized outside the university. I also planned to study more at home than at the faculty. I would be there only when it was necessary.
I was not happy with this decision but I did not see any other possibility.