How do we articulate our own metrics for success in academia?

Tools for reflecting on and identifying what makes your academic work meaningful (or how to shift your focus so your work indeed is meaningful to you)

I’ve written these exact words (up to the secret sauce bit) in my annual reviews and promotion reviews for at least 3 years now.

I’ve been reflecting on how inadequate the metrics of the academic prestige paradigm¹ are. In truth, these metrics are both narrow and lame.

Seriously.

Academics are supposed to be so smart. We study and teach some of the most complicated ideas humans have ever thought of. So, why can’t we handle documenting and recognizing the nuanced ways in which scholarly impact actually manifests!?! 🤦‍♀️That’s a whole thing, and I’m not going to get into it now.

Instead, I’m going to build on my recent discussion of some reasons why I think people in academia—despite not liking the traditional metrics—don’t try to change how we measure/demonstrate success in academia. I’m revisiting these ideas because my first take might have seemed a bit abstract.

What we risk by defining our own metrics of success

So, let me tell you this: It’s risky for me to act as if the outcomes an…