While it would be hard to argue that there is a greater threat to scientists, the overwhelming bureaucracies and ‘reporting’ that currently inundate science are a close second

In every profession, good management practices and appropriate administration are essential for success, and science is no exception. However, as I sat and puzzled over how I would write a “progress report” for a project that had not yet begun, it occurred to me that things are spiraling out of control.

No one in science today doubts that flat or decreasing budgets are threatening both this generation and the next generation of scientists. Experienced researchers are walking around depressed, deflated and embarrassed by their inability to maintain a life’s work in their research. Younger researchers, students and postdocs among them, are turning away from academia as they witness the effects of a system in collapse. Some say that’s a good thing; that the market has long been in need of recalibration. But what’s clear is that there will be fewer scientific advances and breakthroughs in the coming years.

Innovation, however, does not stem exclusively from a steady supply of money. I am coming to believe that the encroachment of excessive bureaucratic practices on scientists’ time is beginning to take its toll on the creativity of science.

I can scarcely remember when I last had an hour to quietly ponder where my own research is leading, and the key unanswered questions that I should address. My world is filled with reports and committees, meetings and a wealth of other obligations. Ranking high among these obligations are the “compliances” that scientists face at every turn, in every institution.

Yearly, although it really seems more frequently, I take a battery of online safety exams. Hazardous materials, recombinant DNA, safe microbiological practices, fire safety, radiation safety and so on. There is even a safety course for sending packages with dry ice. From discussions with colleagues, these requirements are essentially identical at institutes across the US; although they may not (yet) be as prevalent in Europe, this might be due to fear of litigation in this country. On the other hand, my UK colleague Jenny Rohn has recently reported on a worrisome trend in Europe too.

Now I’m certainly not a genius, but I did spend many years in university taking classes and exams – and I feel that I have reasonable retention of material. I remember things that I learned 15 or 20 years ago (some anyway). Is there really a valid reason why I should take a course and exam in safe microbiological practices every year? Is this not a waste of my time? How about every 5 years? Or 10 years? Would that not be more appropriate? I can even remember the questions from last year’s exam…

Just to give some perspective, automobile drivers receive their licenses at age 16 or 18 after taking classes and tests. Are drivers required to retake their theory tests every year to renew their licenses? I don’t think I’ll need to do a careful study to demonstrate that more people die every year in car accidents than in research labs.

While many of the regulations are put in place for a good cause – e.g. courses on diversity in the workplace and sexual harassment are driven by a desire to improve equality and relations between employees – a balance needs to be struck to prevent researchers from seeing these important topics as a chronic waste of time. Just as too much medication is not necessarily more effective in combatting a disease, but might even be dangerous, such is the case with excessive reporting, compliance and other bureaucratic requirements for scientists.

It’s time to give scientists a bit of credit and have scientific institutions and universities show support for their hardworking faculty, especially in these times of uncertain funding. Yearly online safety or compliance courses and exams for a principal investigator (or other experienced scientist) merely make a mockery of the system and drive ridicule rather than respect. Let’s allow scientists to get back to the basics.