[Translate to English:]
by

Feedback on leadership

20/06/2025

In 2019, Recognition and Rewards (R&R) was launched, with our then-rector Frank Baaijens as one of the initiators. The goal: to value scientists more broadly than by the usual hyperbole surrounding grants and top-tier publications. R&R, soon embraced by UNL and NWO, provides space to distinguish oneself in education, societal impact, and leadership. But how are we doing in that last domain, leadership? That’s where the problem lies.

The Ombuds’ annual report makes this painfully clear. Almost all reports trace back to “problems with a supervisor and the hierarchical structure.” That’s no coincidence. In academia, a silent dogma still prevails: that good researchers naturally make good leaders. Group leaders are often selected based on their scientific track record—not on their ability to work with people, to motivate, or to foster a healthy work culture.

No wonder the implementation of the leadership aspect of R&R is proceeding sluggishly. In the academic world, leadership is often seen as: excelling scientifically yourself and showing junior researchers how to do the same. That has value, but it is by no means sufficient. Leadership is also about creating a safe and stimulating work environment. About sparking curiosity. About a culture that strives for open dialogue, transparency, and empathy. About taking responsibility when things go wrong. About putting others in the spotlight. These aspects are crucial, because they shape how future generations experience their work.

And yet, at TU/e, leaders are rarely evaluated on these qualities. Why is that? Well, it takes courage as a leader to ask for feedback. A frank evaluation of your leadership exposes you to criticism. But it’s precisely through that process that you grow. It’s confronting, but I’ve found it to be incredibly useful. You uncover blind spots and gain concrete insights into areas for improvement.

What would help us at TU/e is urgent: start systematically evaluating leadership at all levels. And, of course, evaluation must be followed by concrete action: setting development goals, following up, re-evaluating. Only then will we truly move forward.

If we do this right, hopefully the Ombuds’ job will one day become boring. We will have leaders who understand that scientific excellence and care for people must go hand in hand. Leaders who prevent escalation, show empathy, and think about TU/e’s identity.

Remco Tuinier is a professor of Physical Chemistry and a member of the University Council. He writes this column in a personal capacity.

Share this article