The to do list has grown exponentially so I must clear it today. First task will be checking the index - my co-author has already done so, so no excuse for delay.
The colleagues in France have sent me a set of slides summarising the progress of their group for my comments as a member of the scientific committee of their "chair" in corporate governance. They have significant commercial funding and the work they do meets their sponsors' objectives by providing up-to-date information on areas of interest, such as board diversity, but they find it difficult to translate this work into academic papers. But they are doing some very interesting work on the relationship between board diversity and innovation which I think is very original and has great potential.
Very few people manage to meet the needs of both academic and practitioner audiences, an issue we are constantly grappling with at ICAEW. We had a meeting yesterday to discuss how a funding application which clearly addresses a topic of concern for members could also be developed into an academically rigorous study: the team applying are experts in practice and access would be no problem for them - often a challenge for academics - but their publication track record is very limited. I think we've come up with a way forward but it's tricky.
The research advisory board meeting was very interesting - we were invited to discuss the big unanswered - and unasked - questions in accounting, where research might be developed. My contribution - why is debit on the left? - was greeted with some amusement but I still think it's quite important as asking the question leads into questioning about the history of accounting practice. There is an extensive literature on this but I don't think this particular question has yet been addressed. The reflections of a Big Four partner about to retire on his years in practice confirmed my personal view that the role of a degree in accounting should be to provoke students into thinking about the big picture rather than focusing on technical aspects which they will study in detail in their professional training. Learning how to apply accounting standards won't provide a future generation of thinking accountants like David Tweedie, for example.
Back to the list...
Thursday, 30 May 2013
Tuesday, 28 May 2013
A new week...
.. but only four working days because of the bank holiday. Managed to resist doing any work over the weekend but am now faced with the need to prioritise. First task will be to provide a letter of support for the regrading of the journal. Then I need to email colleagues about items discussed at Friday's research lead meeting. After that I have a pile of papers to read for tomorrow's ICAEW research advisory board meeting. When that's done I can start on proofreading the book index. After lunch, I need to go into work for a meeting and to clear my desk for next week's office move, back to the tiny room I started out in nearly 27 years ago: I think this is my 11th move in that time.
This morning's email contains a request to review a research proposal for a Belgian funding body. The application is from a Belgian academic who I know and the topic - the impact of gender-diverse boards under different regulatory regimes - sounds interesting but it will probably take half a day's work.
And a Google Scholar alert has directed me to a very interesting paper in press at Critical Perspectives on Accounting, a reflective piece by a US academic on the challenges of building a research career which addresses practical problems rather than purely focusing on the US accounting research paradigm. My work is cited in a footnote!
Over the weekend watched "Footnote", an excellent Israeli film set in a very competitive academic environment - glad I'm not a philologist!
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/92817/prize-fighters
This morning's email contains a request to review a research proposal for a Belgian funding body. The application is from a Belgian academic who I know and the topic - the impact of gender-diverse boards under different regulatory regimes - sounds interesting but it will probably take half a day's work.
And a Google Scholar alert has directed me to a very interesting paper in press at Critical Perspectives on Accounting, a reflective piece by a US academic on the challenges of building a research career which addresses practical problems rather than purely focusing on the US accounting research paradigm. My work is cited in a footnote!
Over the weekend watched "Footnote", an excellent Israeli film set in a very competitive academic environment - glad I'm not a philologist!
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/92817/prize-fighters
Friday, 24 May 2013
The weekend starts here...
No, I didn't get the reading done. I did try. I took the papers downstairs to sit in my comfy Stressless chair and read them away from the temptation to check my email but the cats were curled up in the chair and, while I was wondering whether I had the heart to wake them up and move them, the phone rang. The caller asked for information that I needed to return to my computer to locate and of course once I was there I checked my email...
Among the new requests, with very short deadlines:
A message from the editor of the journal I've been associated with for many years asking for a letter which can be sent to academics in Australia and New Zealand who are being encouraged to support the upgrading of the journal in the ANZ journal rankings. This has to be on headed notepaper. Now, I had a copy of the letter template on my PC and it must be somewhere among the files transferred to the Mac but I don't know what it was called and even the excellent Mac search feature couldn't find it. and after some time searching fruitlessly I realised that in any case the template I had saved probably predated the most recent rebranding. A quick attempt to search the university website drew a blank so i made a note to seek expert help at work on Friday.
A request from colleagues in France to review and advise on an abstract for a paper they plan to submit next week for a conference in England in the autumn. The topic is not one that I know much about but I want to be helpful: they are charming people who work at the French business school with which we have an ongoing link and they are former practitioners who are trying to develop stronger research profiles. But it's not my area so I decide to ask a colleague who knows more about it if he can give them some feedback, and hope that he will reply quickly to my email request. (He did, this morning, and he will. Result.
A further email relating to a request for information for a web page for potential doctoral students. The research component of the Faculty web site is an ongoing saga: the university web page structure has been designed in a way that makes it very difficult to make logical links that would make navigation easy and we have a variety of audiences to address so the same information has to be presented in different ways. To respond to this request I need to collect information from several people so I send off further requests. One colleague replies almost immediately, bless her. The others will interpret "as soon as possible" in their own way.
Among the new requests, with very short deadlines:
A message from the editor of the journal I've been associated with for many years asking for a letter which can be sent to academics in Australia and New Zealand who are being encouraged to support the upgrading of the journal in the ANZ journal rankings. This has to be on headed notepaper. Now, I had a copy of the letter template on my PC and it must be somewhere among the files transferred to the Mac but I don't know what it was called and even the excellent Mac search feature couldn't find it. and after some time searching fruitlessly I realised that in any case the template I had saved probably predated the most recent rebranding. A quick attempt to search the university website drew a blank so i made a note to seek expert help at work on Friday.
A request from colleagues in France to review and advise on an abstract for a paper they plan to submit next week for a conference in England in the autumn. The topic is not one that I know much about but I want to be helpful: they are charming people who work at the French business school with which we have an ongoing link and they are former practitioners who are trying to develop stronger research profiles. But it's not my area so I decide to ask a colleague who knows more about it if he can give them some feedback, and hope that he will reply quickly to my email request. (He did, this morning, and he will. Result.
A further email relating to a request for information for a web page for potential doctoral students. The research component of the Faculty web site is an ongoing saga: the university web page structure has been designed in a way that makes it very difficult to make logical links that would make navigation easy and we have a variety of audiences to address so the same information has to be presented in different ways. To respond to this request I need to collect information from several people so I send off further requests. One colleague replies almost immediately, bless her. The others will interpret "as soon as possible" in their own way.
And from Another University a request to review some papers for REF purposes. I was anticipating this and the five papers look interesting but I know they need the feedback quickly so these have to go to the top of the reading pile.
And a request to examine a PhD at a university in the north of the country (do I want to examine a PhD that has only a very peripheral connection to my areas of interest so would probably require a lot of work, in a place a long way away where I know no-one? This invitation does not appear to offer any of the possible incentives that compensate for the derisory fee examiners receive: the chance to learn something from an interesting thesis, to visit a pleasant place and catch up with old chums)
And the papers for next week's ICAEW research advisory board meeting, more weekend reading.
This morning I attended my last research leads meeting. The chair made very kind remarks about this and it was a good meeting which generated some interesting ideas. And while I was in the meeting my inbox filled up with more requests, some of which seem impossible (how can I give approval for something about which no information is provided?) But I did remember to ask for advice on accessing the headed notepaper so now I need to write that letter...
I arrived home to find the NOOK I won in a prize draw on Twitter had arrived. After this and the book token from the Guardian I hoped that the third win might be a big won so I bought a Euromillions ticket on Tuesday. Sadly, no luck.
Thanks to my two readers for their encouraging feedback. And to one for this:
Thursday, 23 May 2013
A reading day?
Will I manage to devote time today to
catching up with the reading piled on my desk? It's 8.45 am and my inbox
contains just a few outstanding items with no deadlines. My marking is done but
most of my colleagues are still embroiled in marking exam scripts so they have
no time to send emails. Why is the annual timetable constructed so oddly?
Marking student assessments is an activity of such great significance that
you'd expect it be accorded adequate time: instead we are forced to comply with
completely unrealistic deadlines which allow little time for reflection or,
possibly more importantly, moderation which ensures standardisation across
marking teams. Wouldn't it make more sense to ensure that every marking
deadline falls at least two weeks after the date of the examination? After more
than a quarter of a century working here, I still don't understand who makes
decisions about this or many other issues to do with the structure and
processes of the university. Or the rationale on which the decisions are taken.
Changes like restructuring seem to happen on a whim, no analysis of costs or
benefits is produced and no objective review of the impact is undertaken.
On Tuesday I visited Another University
where they appointed me visiting professor last year. It was a great pleasure
to go to their splendidly situated campus and to learn about how they are
building a research culture in accounting and finance. It seems much more
supportive than ours, with a higher level of trust in colleagues to get on with
research without the heavily bureaucratic system we have. I shall enjoy working
with them. Of course, they have many of the problems that we face, particularly
around leadership and management. Another strange paradox: business schools are
full of academics researching management problems but are almost invariably
badly managed. I suggested to our previous dean that he might like to read
Chris Grey's "A Very Short Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book
About Studying Organizations": to my surprise, he did so and thanked me.
But he left soon afterwards so we didn't benefit from the insights he said he'd
found in it.
Yesterday morning was mostly taken up with
following up issues from Tuesday's visit, including passing on an invitation to
present a paper to one of my colleagues who is studying banks, who would
benefit greatly from making contact with people at Another University with
similar interests. I also needed to deal with messages needing a swift reply,
from the editors of the two journals whose editorial boards I sit on, and I was
also asked to read an outline funding proposal. This was about mergers and
acquisitions, outside my comfort zone, but I had some reservations about the
quality of the proposal so sought advice from a colleague who is an expert in
the area. His very helpful and speedy response enabled me to feed back some
comments very quickly. While I'm aware of the email burden many colleagues
wrestle with, it makes my life very much easier when people respond quickly and
I try very hard to do the same. Which is partly why all this stuff gets in the
way....
Very pleasant lunch at pub with good friend
who is now in a senior management position and patiently listened to my rants.
Then a meeting of the Faculty grants panel, at which I think I talked far too
much. But that will be my last meeting as the next research lead will attend in
future. I wonder who that will be.
Today's planned reading;
1. "Fund Manager Self- Belief:
Sensemaking and story telling" - this paper was beautifully presented at
the BAFA conference and I was fascinated by the approach and talked to the
presenter afterwards and promised some comments but I haven't yet had time to
read it properly.
2"Who Cares? Corporate Governance in
today's equity markets" an OECD working paper which arrived some time ago.
Monday, 20 May 2013
Things that get in the way...
Now that marking is done and only the index for the book remains to be checked, I am trying to plan the next few weeks so that I can concentrate on reading and writing. I have five different projects, all collaborative, at various stages of development that I am very keen to get back to. But let's see what gets in the way.
It's now 3 pm and I've been working at home since 8 am with two half hour breaks, six hours in total. How did I spend that time?
My to-do list, written last night, started with follow-ups to last week's PhD viva at another university. There were some glitches in the pre-viva admin processes so, when I had completed my expenses claim, I emailed the people concerned to let them know the claim was on its way and to make some gentle comments on how the process had been managed. This was a PhD by published work and, although the viva went well, it transpired that the advice given to the candidate about structuring the commentary to demonstrate the contribution of the work had not been as helpful as it might have been. We examiners discussed this at length and I had promised the internal examiner that I would send some general observations on how this might be addressed for the future. This was quite a tricky email to write so in total these follow-ups took about an hour.
My own PhD student has been wrestling with the amendments to his thesis required by the examiners after his viva. There were about twenty of these but they were not conveyed very helpfully: they were not grouped in any sensible way and it was not easy to see which were the most important. He sent the list together with his responses and the amended thesis first thing this morning and, as time is of the essence if he is to graduate next month, I felt I should reply as soon as possible., He has done a very good job of responding in my opinion - let's hope the examiners agree! As I'd already seen his first attempt last week and had spent an hour or so checking through the revised thesis, looking at this version took less time - about half an hour and a few minutes to email him with a couple of corrections.
While I was doing that, my inbox started to fill up.
1. A request from an administrator for my CV in a prescribed format for accreditation documentation for a course I don't teach on, needed in two days' time. It would take me at least half an hour to rejig my CV into the format so I sent the CV as it is - two minutes to find the most recent version of my CV.
2. A request from the editor of Economia, the house journal of ICAEW for me to write an 1800 word essay by the beginning of July. They asked me earlier in the year and I put them off as I was too busy so I think this time I'll have to say yes. This is the example they have sent me - Gordon Brown, no less:
http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/90f7acee#/90f7acee/62 Twenty minutes of reflection on what I might write about: gender diversity on boards? The blurred boundary between governance and management? Both topics I've been thinking about a good deal in recent months.
3. A request to sit on a professorial appointments panel in Newcastle in ten days' time. I happen to be free on that day but, having spent about ten minutes trying to work out if it was logistically possible given my commitments the day before and the day after, had to decline the invitation.
4. A request for my revised impact case study for the REF submission. As I have been told that it won't be included, this could be cheerfully deleted.
5. Umpteen other messages relating to meetings which needed sorting out in my calendar. Electronic calendars are all very well but seem to generate a lot of email. The original invitation often does not contain a meeting location so a revised invitation later arrives when a room has been booked. As the change made is not specified, I need to check again to make sure it is just the location that has been added. More precious minutes used up.
About two and half hours so far. Then I remembered that while I was at an event in London on Friday I had been sent sent a Dropbox link to the photos taken last month at the BAFA awards reception. I had promised to send them on to the editor of the university newsletter as soon as I received them, together with the citation and a note about how I felt about receiving a Lifetime Achievement Award. Accessing the pictures, choosing the most appropriate one and downloading it took rather longer than I expected and it was nearly an hour before I could send everything off.
Other emails included three journal ToC alerts: checking them quickly I found one paper of considerable interest and spent twenty minutes downloading and skim reading it. Following up alerts to discussions in two LinkedIn groups I belong to took a further twenty minutes. One of these groups - Boards and Advisors - is very active and provides a useful discussion arena as there are practitioner members from all over the world as as well as academics. Interesting articles are regularly posted there and I am involved in several current discussions.
This reminded me to check Twitter where I found new tweets linking to new entries on Stanford and Harvard blogs about corporate governance, with further links to relevant academic articles - more downloading and skim reading. There was also a link to the 2013 Women on Boards survey from GMI Ratings, immensely useful data covering many countries: downloaded and skimmed, saved for reference. (I also discovered that I've won a Nook in a Blackwells prize draw that I had forgotten about entering!)
Next I checked my iGoogle page which collects together blogs that I follow, including the excellent LSE Impact of Social Science blog and PhD2Published which has very helpful tips about writing for PhD students and early career researchers, as well as Robert Goddard's corporate governance blog which keeps me up to date with many useful things which I might otherwise miss. I'm very grateful to all these bloggers who provide such valuable support to my research activities. Links:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/
http://corporatelawandgovernance.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.phd2published.com/
Five hours so far. Back to the inbox which now contains many more messages including papers for a meeting taking place the day after tomorrow (I'm away at another university tomorrow so will have to save these to read on my journeys) and a request from a funding body to review an application (that will be at least half a day's work). Prioritising all these, filing some away under Pending, and starting tomorrow's to do list, takes another half an hour.
There are still three substantial items on today's to do list, to be addressed after the cup of tea which I've been drinking while writing this blog. And I haven't made any progress on the research projects that I really want to get on with...
It's now 3 pm and I've been working at home since 8 am with two half hour breaks, six hours in total. How did I spend that time?
My to-do list, written last night, started with follow-ups to last week's PhD viva at another university. There were some glitches in the pre-viva admin processes so, when I had completed my expenses claim, I emailed the people concerned to let them know the claim was on its way and to make some gentle comments on how the process had been managed. This was a PhD by published work and, although the viva went well, it transpired that the advice given to the candidate about structuring the commentary to demonstrate the contribution of the work had not been as helpful as it might have been. We examiners discussed this at length and I had promised the internal examiner that I would send some general observations on how this might be addressed for the future. This was quite a tricky email to write so in total these follow-ups took about an hour.
My own PhD student has been wrestling with the amendments to his thesis required by the examiners after his viva. There were about twenty of these but they were not conveyed very helpfully: they were not grouped in any sensible way and it was not easy to see which were the most important. He sent the list together with his responses and the amended thesis first thing this morning and, as time is of the essence if he is to graduate next month, I felt I should reply as soon as possible., He has done a very good job of responding in my opinion - let's hope the examiners agree! As I'd already seen his first attempt last week and had spent an hour or so checking through the revised thesis, looking at this version took less time - about half an hour and a few minutes to email him with a couple of corrections.
While I was doing that, my inbox started to fill up.
1. A request from an administrator for my CV in a prescribed format for accreditation documentation for a course I don't teach on, needed in two days' time. It would take me at least half an hour to rejig my CV into the format so I sent the CV as it is - two minutes to find the most recent version of my CV.
2. A request from the editor of Economia, the house journal of ICAEW for me to write an 1800 word essay by the beginning of July. They asked me earlier in the year and I put them off as I was too busy so I think this time I'll have to say yes. This is the example they have sent me - Gordon Brown, no less:
http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/90f7acee#/90f7acee/62 Twenty minutes of reflection on what I might write about: gender diversity on boards? The blurred boundary between governance and management? Both topics I've been thinking about a good deal in recent months.
3. A request to sit on a professorial appointments panel in Newcastle in ten days' time. I happen to be free on that day but, having spent about ten minutes trying to work out if it was logistically possible given my commitments the day before and the day after, had to decline the invitation.
4. A request for my revised impact case study for the REF submission. As I have been told that it won't be included, this could be cheerfully deleted.
5. Umpteen other messages relating to meetings which needed sorting out in my calendar. Electronic calendars are all very well but seem to generate a lot of email. The original invitation often does not contain a meeting location so a revised invitation later arrives when a room has been booked. As the change made is not specified, I need to check again to make sure it is just the location that has been added. More precious minutes used up.
About two and half hours so far. Then I remembered that while I was at an event in London on Friday I had been sent sent a Dropbox link to the photos taken last month at the BAFA awards reception. I had promised to send them on to the editor of the university newsletter as soon as I received them, together with the citation and a note about how I felt about receiving a Lifetime Achievement Award. Accessing the pictures, choosing the most appropriate one and downloading it took rather longer than I expected and it was nearly an hour before I could send everything off.
Other emails included three journal ToC alerts: checking them quickly I found one paper of considerable interest and spent twenty minutes downloading and skim reading it. Following up alerts to discussions in two LinkedIn groups I belong to took a further twenty minutes. One of these groups - Boards and Advisors - is very active and provides a useful discussion arena as there are practitioner members from all over the world as as well as academics. Interesting articles are regularly posted there and I am involved in several current discussions.
This reminded me to check Twitter where I found new tweets linking to new entries on Stanford and Harvard blogs about corporate governance, with further links to relevant academic articles - more downloading and skim reading. There was also a link to the 2013 Women on Boards survey from GMI Ratings, immensely useful data covering many countries: downloaded and skimmed, saved for reference. (I also discovered that I've won a Nook in a Blackwells prize draw that I had forgotten about entering!)
Next I checked my iGoogle page which collects together blogs that I follow, including the excellent LSE Impact of Social Science blog and PhD2Published which has very helpful tips about writing for PhD students and early career researchers, as well as Robert Goddard's corporate governance blog which keeps me up to date with many useful things which I might otherwise miss. I'm very grateful to all these bloggers who provide such valuable support to my research activities. Links:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/
http://corporatelawandgovernance.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.phd2published.com/
Five hours so far. Back to the inbox which now contains many more messages including papers for a meeting taking place the day after tomorrow (I'm away at another university tomorrow so will have to save these to read on my journeys) and a request from a funding body to review an application (that will be at least half a day's work). Prioritising all these, filing some away under Pending, and starting tomorrow's to do list, takes another half an hour.
There are still three substantial items on today's to do list, to be addressed after the cup of tea which I've been drinking while writing this blog. And I haven't made any progress on the research projects that I really want to get on with...
Wednesday, 27 March 2013
Incredibly it's a year and 3 days since my last blog entry! What have I been doing all that time? Well, mostly the book which went off to OUP in January. Co-author finally delivered, I had to rewrite parts of some of my chapters to fit it all together and then I insisted on taking over the final tidying up of the manuscript. That took a concentrated week of editing but I was surprised when Emma, the very patient editor, complimented me on the state of the final version - all I did was follow the instructions but it makes me wonder what some authors submit. The copy editor's queries were minimal and we're now waiting for the proofs. Publication date is in September. Can't quite believe we've got this far after the long dragging, frustrating process and I'm still sad that we didn't get it out last year. I've been invited to two events in recent months where it would have been wonderful to have copies or at least publicity material.
It's been a tough year at work and I seem to have spent a lot of time being an ear and a shoulder dealing with the fallout from the stupid restructuring. But we finally have a new head of department and I no longer feel I need to play a big support role. I've finally negotiated a retirement deal, another strangely bizarre process with some irrational behaviour by my employers but I should be used to that after all these years... From September, I only have to do research until I finish in April 2014. Giving up the admin will be a great relief. No teaching either! This semester's teaching has not been much fun but it's over now, with just the marking to deal with in a few week's time.
Best thing has been working with my post doc. His politics background gives an interesting perspective to accountability issues and we've finally got a pilot study off the ground, looking at the role of NEDs in public/third sector organisations. We're in the middle of interviewing and some fascinating insights are emerging. I have lots of stuff collected for other papers which I hope I'll find time to organise over the summer.
Our trip to Vancouver was lovely but we didn't get as far as Seattle as Mother-in-law died. An October cruise to the Canaries as compensation was rather disappointing although I got lots of work done on the book. This summer we're going to Iceland and hopefully Chicago later.
Next month I'll be off to the BAFA conference in Newcastle to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award which is rather nice. The Brussels workshop has been postponed until October which suits me well.
Last week I was invited to sit on a panel at the ICSA conference entitled "Cadbury Reunited". It was great fun talking to two former members of the Committee, both of whom we had interviewed for the book and the chair, Sara Coburn, was very good, very well briefed and a charming person. Good feedback afterwards and quite a few LinkedIn requests from people who were in the audience. No preparation required which made it even better! In contrast, being invited to address the Management Accounting Research Group conference on management accounting and corporate governance at LSE next month is demanding a great deal of work. I have been struggling with the slides (required today!) for weeks and finally realised why: my argument didn't work! Turning it round made much more sense although I now find myself disagreeing with Sir Adrian as to whether governance and management should be kept clearly separate.
It's been a tough year at work and I seem to have spent a lot of time being an ear and a shoulder dealing with the fallout from the stupid restructuring. But we finally have a new head of department and I no longer feel I need to play a big support role. I've finally negotiated a retirement deal, another strangely bizarre process with some irrational behaviour by my employers but I should be used to that after all these years... From September, I only have to do research until I finish in April 2014. Giving up the admin will be a great relief. No teaching either! This semester's teaching has not been much fun but it's over now, with just the marking to deal with in a few week's time.
Best thing has been working with my post doc. His politics background gives an interesting perspective to accountability issues and we've finally got a pilot study off the ground, looking at the role of NEDs in public/third sector organisations. We're in the middle of interviewing and some fascinating insights are emerging. I have lots of stuff collected for other papers which I hope I'll find time to organise over the summer.
Our trip to Vancouver was lovely but we didn't get as far as Seattle as Mother-in-law died. An October cruise to the Canaries as compensation was rather disappointing although I got lots of work done on the book. This summer we're going to Iceland and hopefully Chicago later.
Next month I'll be off to the BAFA conference in Newcastle to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award which is rather nice. The Brussels workshop has been postponed until October which suits me well.
Last week I was invited to sit on a panel at the ICSA conference entitled "Cadbury Reunited". It was great fun talking to two former members of the Committee, both of whom we had interviewed for the book and the chair, Sara Coburn, was very good, very well briefed and a charming person. Good feedback afterwards and quite a few LinkedIn requests from people who were in the audience. No preparation required which made it even better! In contrast, being invited to address the Management Accounting Research Group conference on management accounting and corporate governance at LSE next month is demanding a great deal of work. I have been struggling with the slides (required today!) for weeks and finally realised why: my argument didn't work! Turning it round made much more sense although I now find myself disagreeing with Sir Adrian as to whether governance and management should be kept clearly separate.
Saturday, 24 March 2012
No post since 14 February - what have I been doing all these weeks ? Well, I've been to the Hockney exhibition 4 times (and will go again next week). My RA Friends subscription has been great value this year and I've been able to take lots of friends and everyone has liked it. My favourite picture is this one:
I've spent time supervising students which has really been a pleasure as I have a bright bunch at the moment. Departmental admin stuff has absorbed more time, as has entertaining visiting speakers, all of whom were really good. An excellent workshop on writing bids run by Mike Wallace and Alison Wray gave me much food for thought and will improve my reviewing as well as my bid writing.
I've worked hard on chapter 6 and begun on chapter 7. A long silence from my co-author ended when I received the draft of chapter 4 and she says she's almost finished chapter 3. I have some time in the coming week which I'd like to use putting it all together but I also want to finish the "Be careful what you wish for" paper so that I can submit it for a conference by the end of the week. The reading pile grows and grows - several useful chats with Thom identifying parallels between the private and public sectors in accountability issues have led me to more interesting work to explore.
My application for promotion to level 2 on the professorial scale was successful but the pay rise is paltry compared to the salaries of my peers elsewhere so I am still considering putting myself and my REFable outputs on eBay.
I had a letter published in the Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-bankers-pay-7561652.html
(scroll down)
This seems to have attracted some lunatic anti-feminist men who think my views support their prejudices, which is a bit scary, as well as a typewritten letter (long time since I've seen one of those) from an elderly lady, which seems to have no relevance to the topic.
I went to the ICSA conference but arrived late - fog led to the A40 being closed after an accident so I was stuck on the bus for 3 hours - and left early because of the ferocious aircon in the conference room. A very useful update on EU corporate governance developments made the trip worthwhile, though.
The weather has brightened up and Beanie the cat finally seems to be recovering from a very lengthy illness.
Much travel ahead: the trip to Vancouver in August is booked, as well as the weekend in Copenhagen in June and the Brussels workshop in May. I'll be at the BAFA conference in Brighton in April and it looks as if the research methods workshop will go ahead the following week.
Onward and upward...
I've spent time supervising students which has really been a pleasure as I have a bright bunch at the moment. Departmental admin stuff has absorbed more time, as has entertaining visiting speakers, all of whom were really good. An excellent workshop on writing bids run by Mike Wallace and Alison Wray gave me much food for thought and will improve my reviewing as well as my bid writing.
I've worked hard on chapter 6 and begun on chapter 7. A long silence from my co-author ended when I received the draft of chapter 4 and she says she's almost finished chapter 3. I have some time in the coming week which I'd like to use putting it all together but I also want to finish the "Be careful what you wish for" paper so that I can submit it for a conference by the end of the week. The reading pile grows and grows - several useful chats with Thom identifying parallels between the private and public sectors in accountability issues have led me to more interesting work to explore.
My application for promotion to level 2 on the professorial scale was successful but the pay rise is paltry compared to the salaries of my peers elsewhere so I am still considering putting myself and my REFable outputs on eBay.
I had a letter published in the Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-bankers-pay-7561652.html
(scroll down)
This seems to have attracted some lunatic anti-feminist men who think my views support their prejudices, which is a bit scary, as well as a typewritten letter (long time since I've seen one of those) from an elderly lady, which seems to have no relevance to the topic.
I went to the ICSA conference but arrived late - fog led to the A40 being closed after an accident so I was stuck on the bus for 3 hours - and left early because of the ferocious aircon in the conference room. A very useful update on EU corporate governance developments made the trip worthwhile, though.
The weather has brightened up and Beanie the cat finally seems to be recovering from a very lengthy illness.
Much travel ahead: the trip to Vancouver in August is booked, as well as the weekend in Copenhagen in June and the Brussels workshop in May. I'll be at the BAFA conference in Brighton in April and it looks as if the research methods workshop will go ahead the following week.
Onward and upward...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)