Ending My Deputy Directorship

I have not blogged for quite awhile partly because of sensitive issues surrounding my role as Deputy Director of Institute for Mathematical Research (INSPEM) in UPM. However I think the time has come for me to give up this post. I have written to the upper management that I wish to resign as Deputy Director citing health reasons. Indeed there were several times my body simply shuts down when under great stress, perhaps as a safety mechanism. Presently, I am still waiting for an official answer. In normal circumstances, I would not have done this but given that some quarters do not find me suitable, presently I think my leaving is for the greater good.

I have served two directors in Institute for Mathematical Research with some periods of me carrying out the duties of the Director; the present term is the longest. I have also served under one director at Institute of Advanced Technology (ITMA) in 2002-2006, and under one director at Multimedia Institute in 1999-2002, the latter is no longer in existence. I tried to carry out the duties assigned to me and in many places contribute to the realisation of the vision of the institute. I have my own vision of what an institute should be though sadly I will not see this at least within my remaining years of services.

With me leaving the post, my wish is that the institute will continue to grow since I view institutes as drivers of new research culture. I believe INSPEM has contributed much to mathematical research in UPM and I have highlighted this before here. How should the institute progress further, I leave this to the creativity of the younger generation and the wisdom of the university. There are a few advices (if anyone wishes to listen) that I would like to give:

• Avoid drastic changes to institutes each time a new line up of management comes. Strengths are built from traditions; once removed, there may be a need to rebuild this in the future. Take longer term views of how the institute should contribute (even beyond the terms of the existing management).
• While raising standards over time, look at the fine details of research culture of each discipline. This is certainly difficult to do but it will promote natural growth for the researchers of the institute. Blanket KPIs almost always promote deceit or manipulation, which is certainly not the things we want.
• We must rise above any form of territorialism and look at the bigger picture how science as a whole should progress. Be inclusive wherever possible. The idea of the institute should be to provide new research opportunities (not stifle it). The leader himself should be much more open than the members, knowing well how different domains of knowledge interact.
• Go for internationalisation (as part of providing new research opportunities). This will serve the institute (and the university as a whole) better. If possible, have a leader of international standing, a person who commands respect from others internationally, not for his/her position but for the knowledge he/she has.

These are probably the main ones that I can think of. All the best for the future, INSPEM.