Page 72 - Through the gate of the neoliberal academy • Herschberg

70 CHAPTER 3
Well, I think, what drives me crazy is indeed the obsession with excellence. And for everybody; we all have to be excellent. Well, that is by definition impossible. Excellent means that you are far above average. So I am a little careful with using that word. (STEM, 5, M)
This committee member makes a reference to the general “obsession with excellence” in academia, revealing that the discourse has found its way into the system. Yet, the quote shows the difficulty inherent to the discourse of excellence: it is “by definition impossible” for everybody to be excellent, which implies that the ambitions of the university and the department are infeasible.
Social sciences. Committee members in the Social Sciences department argued too that research quality is the most important selection criterion for assistant professorships. In line with respondents in the Natural Sciences department, they explained that selection criteria for assistant professor positions in the Social Sciences are pliant, because applicants for these positions are still junior.
Usually, an assistant professor is a very young person; someone who has just obtained a PhD, or not yet obtained a PhD. In this scenario, of course, you cannot expect very much. They just have a few publications and a little teaching experience. Well, of course they do not yet have administrative experience. Those are, of course, the three tasks. So, you’re looking for someone you think is suitable to fulfil these three tasks, but, you cannot demand too much. (SSH, 2, F)
The quote shows that the experience and publications of applicants tend to be limited and, therefore, the committee member assesses the likelihood that a candidate can fulfil the required tasks in the future. This assessment of potential can be problematic, as potential in itself is a subjective criterion and its assessment is based on only limited past performance. This can create inequality, as potential is susceptible to bias and stereotypes. For instance, Van den Brink and colleagues (2016) have shown that men’s potential is systematically evaluated higher than women’s potential.
Despite the omnipresence of the discourse of excellence at university and department level, some respondents argue that recruiting excellent assistant professors is hardly feasible. Therefore, they do not consent with macro- and meso- level criteria. One committee member stated that it is difficult to attract excellent candidates, because they have multiple offers from various institutions. Therefore, he argues, you have to win the “competition” from “other universities” in order to get the