It has been debated and data presented. I don’t have time to find the link. But conference affiliation (even though mostly done for sports reasons) often do then lead to academic/research affiliations. For example, the Big Ten Academic Alliance: Research | Big Ten Academic Alliance. Basically, having these associations just make things easier to collaborate, work through grant and contract components, and share facilities with some shared agreement platforms. So, yes, researchers can collaborate with other specialists in their fields (which they do), but there is some synergy to going in joint on projects with stuff that’s already in place rather than having to go through the additional bureaucracy (which no one likes and they just want to get on with the research).
It’s just kind of the ‘peer’ institution effect and once again, the athletics department is kind of a marketing arm and it bleeds over into who your ‘peers’ are. AAU inclusion is another way to see it (which PAC12 >>>> Big 12 in that regard), but since universities are already engaged with other presidents (and ADs) for sports, they kind of just keep with that clique.
Individual researchers can do whatever, but the easier path is to hook onto what the institution is doing to help them, and that’s why these associations seem to matter. You scratch our backs in sports, we scratch your back in research …
With the PAC it was just basic marketing. People socialize, often there’s a ball game on in the background. Even if research funding decision makers aren’t into sports, they see on TV Utah’s name associated with Stanford / Cal / UCLA / UW / USC, etc.
The folks I know who are responsible for faculty recruitment said there was a noticeable bump, an increase in name recognition, association with some other highly regarded schools.
To Seattle’s point, I don’t know if sports has much of an impact at the very highest levels. I don’t know if Mario Cappechi cares about football. But he might watch a little… because some of his social circles might be getting together to watch a game.
Put differently, did Robert Oppenheimer care about skiing? Who knows, but it was important to cultivate social cohesion at Los Alamos, so they had that ad-hoc ski hill to release some tension and take a break from their work.
Every time I’ve been around people socializing around a Utah football game, nobody (except me) watches every play. Thank god for replay. But the socializing & name association grease the skids for mindshare.
Thanks for the link and response. It reinforces what I’ve read and heard previously, namely, that the Big Ten, plus former conference member Chicago, is as much of an academic consortium as an athletic conference. I suspect that the same is true for the Ivy League. There aren’t a lot of hard (dollar) numbers, though that’s okay and probably an ever-changing value.
With that in mind, I’d like to pursue this a bit further, not to slam but to understand. I’ve read previously that a small scale collaboration exist(ed?) in the Pac, with at least some schools. Does the fact that member schools are now being scattered to four separate destinations destroy that cooperation and joint research? I can’t see that happening because that strikes me as narrow minded in the extreme and massively counterproductive to gaining new knowledge and pushing back the information envelope. If anything, the opposite should be the case. With former member schools spread across four separate athletic destinations, wouldn’t that expand collaboration, by introducing new, similarly-focused schools, with which to hob knob, strike up new alliances to supplement, rather than supplant, those in the Pac, and create an ever greater win-win for everyone involved?
At the risk of an imperfect but hopefully ballpark comparison, whenever I’ve moved to a new location, always far removed from the previous place (no cross-town or county moves for me), it’s not like I’ve jettisoned my former friends and acquaintances. Far from it, I keep in touch and still get together whenever circumstances permit, sometimes to include shared vacations or visits.
As mentioned earlier, I’m seeking to separate fact from fiction and can’t see why Utah researchers won’t be able to continue collaborations with schools from the soon-to-vanish Pac, plus engage in similar efforts with high-end Big-12 schools, which has 5 AAU schools (plus former AAU member Iowa State, whose banishment reminds me of what happened to Nebraska) and a number of other quality institutions which aren’t in the AAU.
Yes, there used to be PAC academic conferences, though I don’t believe the PAC schools went to the same length as the B1G, with undergraduate course-sharing.
The nature of research collaboration is really dependent upon the specific field, and the specific researcher. Researchers are responsible for landing their own grants, and if joining research consortiums support and extend that research, it’s a smart move.
We have researchers who have extensive connections with researchers at UCLA, for example, or University of Pittsburgh, or UCSD, etc. I’m sure the schools change, depending on the part of the U, and the researcher. Connections with European universities, and east Asia, too, or even independent labs formed by foundations, and collaborations with industry, as well (carefully monitored).
That’s not going to change, it’s not dependent upon athletic affiliation.
Utah benefitted from being in the PAC, unquestionably - it helped prime the pump, helped elevate our mindshare. But ultimately the research follows its own path, and if you’re not producing high quality work it doesn’t matter what conference you’re in. “Publish or perish” doesn’t care about athletics, and if you’re not bringing in your own grant money, it gets tough. Very competitive.
No question being in the B1G would help catalyze more connections, and the marketing would be a net positive, just as it was in the PAC.
Keep in mind it’s all about resources, not actual sharing of funds. When schools have access to their peers’ resources they are able to qualify for additional research activities and funding. Utah is going from a peer group of almost all top-level research institutions to one with very few.
For perspective, Utah’s Pac-12 affiliation has helped it grow its research funding by over $300M per year from where it was previously. It will be virtually impossible to keep that level and trajectory up without a similar peer group. While there is no way to predict the precise impact, needless to say the backdrop here is a massive scale.
I think we’ll have to wait and see. I think researchers will contibue partnership they have gained and continue to collaberate with others where it makes sense. There will be a lag, but over time, without some institutional support and backing to make it easy, things become harder. Utah can choose to keep up those partnerships in some ways, but it draws from limited resources and other schools may move on to their new partnerships as well. Existing contracts, grants, projects are all good. Continuing those with new grants is possible but gets increasingly harder - professors move, administrators move, and support for new affiliations increases (affiliations again somewhat tied to the sports conference). I think it’s worth it to continue to fight for research resource sharing with west coast AAU schools, but it might be an uphill battle with former girlfriends that want to ‘move on’.
We definitely saw a lift in ‘moving up’ neighborhoods from MWC to PAC. What happens when we ‘move down’ neighborhoods to the Big 12 (academic research of those schools) is a guess. Some here postulate it will hurt. Maybe for new research opportunities. Maybe it’s level, with prior relationships continuing and trumping the sports affiliations. I hope Randall will keep the momentum and help researchers anyway he can with whatever universities are willing to partner, regardless of sports ties.
I know when I’ve moved houses, offices, congregations, I keep up with some at first, but then it’s easier to just be friends with those more immediately around me until I only occassionally get together, message, or facebook stalk prior friends and acquaintances. It takes a lot more effort to get together with that college roomate, requiring a trip to the Rose Bowl or such …
E-Ute & DataUte prompt me to consider the longer lifecycle of research.
This time of year, undergrads graduate, some have aspired to become medical students and/or grad students, and typically apply to a variety of schools, frequently around the country. Conference affiliation here has a significant impact. Mindshare of schools is already imprinted - the Ivy League, Vanderbilt, B1G, PAC schools, etc. At this level Utah is still building, far beyond where we were, not where we want to be.
Of med students and grad students, some aspire to really make a difference in research, instead of simply going out to practice or in industry to make money. No question the workload is immense, especially for those who combine programs, ie, MD-PhD programs. Under senior researchers / “Principal Investigators” / high level MD faculty, they start to make a name for themselves in the research world…ie, get published, as a secondary author. Athletics fades in their schedules, this is where they’re building a foundation to make their programs and schools look good.
Residency / post doc - For those who get to this point and still want to pursue research / academics, this is where the trajectory of their work is established. Not quite Principal Investigators, they’re the next generation of name researchers. They participate in academic conferences, make impressions, set their own research path. They’re represent their schools in publishing and at conferences, here, to a large extent. Individual reputations and connections are made, schools are represented.
Faculty - where before students and residents chose schools based on reputation or to study under specific areas of research or particular researchers, at this stage is where the institution’s reputation is really built. They begin to recruit and mentor med and grad students, themselves… this effort is integral to their own trajectories as researchers, how high they’ll reach. It’s a team, nobody does this work alone. They reach out to same topic researchers at other institutions.
Grants - this is the ultimate test of who can hang in high level research. It’s extremely competitive, some find their appetite was greater than their capability or willingness to sacrifice. If they’re not successful in landing grants, they may leave the research track and teach, or they may decide to go the corporate route, or for MD, just go into practice. Those who are successful tend to find it becomes easier, like an NBA player shooting free-throws. Success begets success. Reputations are no longer intentionally cultivated, at this point. Track records take over, at the top tier of research and grant funding - the R01 grants, which are over $1M. Publishing is imperative - getting articles in Science or Nature or NEJM is a gold medal, in addition to building a name in your field or field-specific journals.
Athletics-prompted mindshare begins with undergraduate applicants, helps Utah get into conversations and considerations with graduate and medical school applicants. Then up the ladder with researchers, Post-Docs, Residents and finally into the Faculty level, Utah’s academic reputation is built and elevated.
It’s a re-iterative process where marketing and reputation are crucial, in recruiting, then in attracting recruits. Athletics and conference affiliation are a part of that marketing, but it just gets foots in doors, gets attention from people who might not have been looking our way.
In our office we had regular contact with our PAC 12 counterparts. Also Our leadership had a PAC12 working group to discuss common issues. I have not heard anything from Big 12 colleagues yet but that may come down the road. I joined the office well after the PAC 12 era started but my understanding was that others from the PAC 12 reached out to Utah from a broad spectrum of offices and academic departments almost immediately. When I started in my role I talked to my counterparts pretty quickly and I still maintain contact. I will see how that relationship is going forward now that the common affiliation is gone with some of these schools.
I can definitely say that in the case of the PAC 12 it was much more than just a sports conference for sure. We’ll see what happens with the BIG 12.
A lot of what drives research is our alumni simply doing business. Athletic event are a great feeder-collector for getting people together, and the more well heeled an excuse to take a break and enjoy a ballgame. In Rice-Eccles phase one, though we didn’t build out as many luxury boxes as some of our counterparts have, the addition did radically increase our offering and opportunity for the social aspect of hob-nobbing. The SEZ expansion more than doubled that opportunity.
The short answer, people do stuff with other people they like. If they like you enough to hang out with you, or to get to know you, at a social event (like a football game) your odds improve to discuss opportunities. The difference is simply there are a hell of a lot more well-heeled alums at the PAC 12 schools than there are in the BIG 12. Had it been research alone, we’d have seen explosive growth in ours during the WAC and MWC eras - we didn’t.
At some point, there will be 3 major conferences. Whether the surviving conference (after the BIG10 and SEC choose who will join their conferences) has the name Big12, ACC or something new doesn’t matter. That surviving conference will be, just as the Big12 and ACC are today, behind the Big10/SEC in every measurable way. Every school, not just Utah, should be batting its eyes and making every effort to make itself as pretty as possible in hopes of an invite to the Big10/SEC. I am hoping the next realignment happens sooner, rather then later, and that Utah is given a rose by the Big10.
Great insight - things vary depending on the part of campus. Health sciences will differ from other areas, of course. Researcher & topic driven. We host a few international conferences, for example, some admittedly narrow, disease-based focii.
I think Utah would be smart to initiate the same kind of interaction we had in the PAC with Big-12 members, if it doesn’t already exist. Be a leader.
Between the impacts of the salary direction and perhaps some Congressional involvement for NCAA and conferences to get some antitrust protection, and the travel issue - that is really yet to be fully manifested - I have to think there will be a need for more schools out west at the P2 level.
Thanks to each of you for your thoughtful and insightful responses, exactly the sort of perspectives I was hoping to get. It’s been educational and informative in multiple ways, which I greatly appreciate. However much I want BYU to beat Utah in athletic competition, it doesn’t in any way diminish my respect for what Utah accomplishes, academically and in terms of research, which, as mentioned previously, benefits everyone who lives in the Beehive State, as well as the other institutions of higher learning.
I’ve had colleagues, who moved to Utah, after I returned from working multiple places elsewhere in far-flung locations, tell me that they are astounded at the quality of Utah’s (the state) medical services, much better than where they lived previously. I attribute much of that to Utah’s (the university) medical school and affiliated institutions. To quote Ma-ake, “be a leader.”
A couple of other thoughts:
DataUte mentioned the gradual diminishing of contact when relocating. If that happens in Utah’s research, it seems to suggest that researchers haven’t quit doing what they’ve done, just found other partners with whom to collaborate. While one hopes to maintain the old and add with the new, it seems to me that, either way, the research and knowledge acquisition trains will continue to move forward.
I also agree that Pac membership benefited Utah in that arena, no two ways about. I view it as something of a “pump priming” exercise, which seems like it can continue, going forward, because the research engine will keep running. Perhaps all it means is that Utah’s collaborative focus will shift slightly but remain its existing momentum.
Again, my thanks for what has been a most enjoyable and useful discussion.
There is growing collaboration within the state - with UVU, BYU, Weber (Nursing and Radiation Therapy), USU, etc.
It’s summer, so we’ll be getting a bunch of undergrad interns from other schools in Utah and even some HS student interns. Last summer we hosted a number of students from Howard University, hopefully help to show a completely different side of America, for them. Pay it forward.
Just like with the recently departed Utah BB great Kenny Gardner - who got a heart transplant from a BYU athlete - at the end of the day it’s about working together to lift everyone up.
But to be clear, this Walton-esque group hug is suspended on November 9.
Of course, Ma-ake, of course, it wouldn’t be right any other way.
Or as a former colleague put it, in a high school game, he found himself lined up opposite his best friend at church, who lived on the other side of town. Prior to the first snap, his friend said, “friends after the game,” at which point they tried to kill each other for the next 60 minutes.
