Identify Toxic Academic Workplaces

Save yourself by identifying these red flags.

Published in

Orthogonal Research and Education Lab

5 min readSep 8, 2023

A few years back when I delved into the world of academia, little did I realize how broken Academia would be. All I envisioned about academia was as the land of “Invention”, “Breakthrough”, and “Discovery”. Having fun while doing “Groundbreaking”, “Novel”, and “Interesting” research. However, my own experiences doing Research has been somewhat contrary and mixed as there is another side to academia which is often not advertised as loudly.

A common path to build a career in academia/research is to either pursue a PhD or work as a Research Assistant/P.I. in an academic research lab. However, there are multiple important things that people are unaware of before deciding to commit to a research program.

If you find yourself attracted to the Academic path, then this article should outline what are the common red flags that you should look out for in prospective (or current) PhD guides and advisors in industry or academic research settings. Most students often forget that doing research involves building lot of professional relationships with peers and mentors. Navigating this space without doing any research is a recipe for disaster.

Toxic Behaviors

But before we start identifying the Red Flags it’s important to know what lies beneath. What are behaviors which ring alarm bells and are truly toxic?

Forcing you to work on a topic you are disinterested in despite multiple dialogue and discussions while being dishonest about the kind of work done.
Gaslighting.
Leaving out information and keeping you away from critical project decisions, meetings instead of being transparent.
Constant and repetitive abuse, gossip behind your back causing your plans, experiments to fail.
A “Push and Pull” relationship dynamic to keep you “on your toes” being psychologically manipulative and causing one to crave their approval.
An Autocratic Style (“Do as your told”, “You ask too many questions”, “Don’t worry about this” “Don’t do X”) with micromanagement.
Being extremely uninvolved.
People being very hesitant and finding it difficult to express or discuss important issues and ideas.

Reason for Toxic behaviors.

Toxic behaviors in academia can arise due to the “Publish or Perish” mantra, leaving bad actors to enforce their tyranny for the sake of superiority and dominance which is a facade. Many people have a somewhat “Zero-sum game” mindset which can be extremely harmful since it hampers collaborative and independent work to thrive. Such people thrive in an environment where they can control and accumulate power rather than collaboration and contribution. One of the major reasons why Industry or Industrial research & development is successful is due to the emphasis on collaboration.

It is important to note that the success of an individual in a research environment boils down to not just the skills & knowledge but their personality and the lab/research culture too(environment). It’s important to research about the culture, work culture, views on research in different labs as this might create problems later on.

How to Identify Red-Flags

What can be done in most scenarios is to be more cautious and alert before proceeding in academia. I outline some suggestions which on probing can reveal numerous red flags:

Consult with people who have completed working there before: Those who are still involved might not be in a position to provide complete and unbiased view of advisors.
Listen(please) to what your peers or seniors have to say: More often than not your peers(seniors) might have faced similar issues and usually won’t speak something bad unless they had such an experience.
What is the lab environment like: Notice the behavior of people in and around the lab. Do people actively avoid coming to the lab (like >7/8?). Do people avoid participating in lab activities? Does everyone outside that lab question why that lab? Does the lab have an “air of death”? or an “air of liveliness”.
What is the average tenure of a given position: Ask your peers what’s the average length to complete a PhD/Research Assistantship/Research Project under the given lab and the rate at which people pass out. A major red flag is seeing labs hold students for greater than 3 years for a Masters.
Does the advisor know how to manage their time? Advisors have many responsibilities, including managing multiple projects simultaneously. This often leads to difficulty in setting one-on-one meetings and can impact research progress. Having too many advisees can also lead to future issues with time management.
Research into the strength of the lab/project: The number of Masters’ and PhD students in a research group are a great indicator as to whether people go out of their way to join a particular lab. Number of Bachelor’s students usually is great indicator about the lab. If the ratio of advisors to students is very low, it might be a big problem!
Research into the amount of funding: Many labs post Research Positions but do not end up paying them. In many cases they might try to leverage that they would provide a Letter of Recommendation but that’s no substitute for unpaid labor. The number of grants (especially from BigTech) offered to the lab usually indicative about their work as well. Besides the recurring grants, grants from newer orgs usually clearly indicate that their work is valuable or else why would anyone want to work with them?
Research how the lab culture operates: Newly established labs usually lack established research agendas which might not be suitable for some applicants. Labs which are extremely old might have agendas that are too niche. Finding a balance is important.
How many years/what experience(s) does the Advisor have? Often new Advisors/Assistant Professors are inexperienced, figuring out how to mentor and this might create problems when working on topics beyond their area of expertise and waste some time while under-estimating the amount of time it takes to complete tasks.
Biased Gender/Racial/Social Dynamics: Take note if the group strangely favors people from certain groups over others. This can easily be seen by looking at the Co-authors, Students, Conferences the person publishes their work.
Notice at the number and type of publications: Publishing too many as well as too few papers are a major red flag. Especially note the citations to get an insight into the progressiveness and the lab’s direction. A lab with a open mindset is best for people from different walks of life to spur new research. Too many papers per lab members and the folks are likely overworked, too few papers per lab member and someone is generally carrying the load.
Notice at what behavior is normalized: Bottom line: if toxic behaviors are normalized, the place is unfit for diverse, creative minded individuals.

Conclusion

I would conclude by stating that it’s important to realize that identifying such red flags can safeguard both the physical and mental health of future academic enthusiasts and needs to be taken care seriously before committing to any advisor of a lab. Working in research is very similar to being in a relationship and thus identifying red flags is very important!

References

https://www.themuse.com/advice/gaslighting-at-work-signs-examples-tips