A protected space for creative and surprising thoughts

Mr. Schütte, you started your career as a science manager in the early 1990s right after earning your doctorate. Does one have to look far to bring out the researcher in you?

Schütte: Yes and no. Although my work as a researcher was way back, I remember the time well. I know what it means to work in science as a young researcher and to start a family at the same time. I was able to combine both without having to take the long road to a professorship. I have been living out my passion for science for 30 years by working in positions connected with the creation of new knowledge at universities.

Schleiff: To my mind, science management and research are not contradictory. Thinking about what makes universities tick and how they can develop further is a type of science in and of itself. And in practical terms, learning how the university "system" can be further developed is rather like an experiment.  However, there is an essential difference in that we cannot entirely control the framework conditions – and often don’t want to – but rather seek to provide impulses to productively prod the "system".

Let's look at whether the idea of a fulfilling life in science is a generational issue. You, Mr. Schütte, were born in the Münsterland in 1962. Mr. Schleiff was born in Luckenwalde in 1971 and grew up in the GDR.

Schütte: A fulfilling life in science is a creative life in which new knowledge is created.

Then that takes care of one problem.

Schütte: Not quite: we very much need to think about how to balance the parts of our lives spent outside and inside scientific institutions. We also need to talk about the distribution of opportunities for achieving a fulfilling life in science.

Schleiff: As mentioned, reconciling different individual needs with institutional requirements is challenging – and at times complex. Viable solutions require multilayered negotiation processes that lead to a mutually agreed result. That being said, these results must remain open to discussion and change, because needs and requirements also change. It is important to remember that science is always both a passion and a profession.

Would you, Mr. Schleiff, have stayed in science if the Volkswagen Foundation had not supported you through the junior research group funding program at the start of your career?

Schleiff: I find "what if" questions difficult to answer. At that time, I had just applied for a job in industry. Having become a father, I had to plan for the longer term. The funding from the Volkswagen Foundation came at just the right time. 

Goethe University has a Graduate Academy for Early Career Researchers. It took almost a decade to set it up. What was the problem? 

Schleiff: I can understand how, from an outsider’s perspective, that impression can arise. But GRADE, our Goethe Research Academy for Early Career Researchers, was based on the structures that existed then, and further development is by definition a continuous process. Starting last year and into 2023, for example, we adjusted our job concept for positions below the professorship to offer more researchers plannable career paths. We foster independence, internationality, and transdisciplinary collaboration. To become even better in this regard, we would like to see more support from politics and science-funding organizations.

Only 16 percent of doctoral students in Germany intend to pursue a university career, compared to 22 percent in 2019. The OECD warns there could soon be a shortage of researchers. Do you share this assessment?

Schütte: I am cautious about making predictions. However, we should keep a close eye on where highly qualified talent is going. How attractive is the German university job market in the hard sciences, for example? If we compare what doctoral students and postdocs earn in Germany and at ETH Zurich, the international competition is clearly evident.

Schleiff: I would approach the question differently. The fact that scientists constantly have to develop new skills and competences does not contribute to making this professional field more attractive. If, on the one hand, we assume that a fulfilling life in science is linked to creativity and freedom, but on the other hand look at the growing catalog of requirements, that contradiction becomes obvious. Innovative teaching, publications, third-party funding, patents, science communication – had I been confronted with such a magnitude of expectations as a young person, my passion for science might well have waned

Schütte: Symptoms of being overwhelmed are always there. They are difficult to deal with. But we need to create clarity about what universities can and cannot do. Above all, we need to make it clear that universities cannot do everything at the same time. Research and performance profiles must be more sharply contoured.

Schleiff: Unfortunately, the general commitment to such differentiation is not reflected in financing and funding policies. Instead, what I have observed over the past 15 years is a convergence of profiles. As opposed to building on existing strengths, policy makers are assigning the same set of tasks to all universities.

Do universities still attract the best minds?

Schütte: How to identify the best minds is also a major topic for us at the Foundation. We are currently funding research on evaluation systems in science. What is good science? What kind of science do we need? We expect to have robust findings in three to four years.

Schleiff: I would like to have the results already today. I personally do not know whether we attract the very best minds to our universities. What I do know beyond any doubt, however, is that we are already gaining lots of truly outstanding personalities. Incidentally, when talking about their work, all of their faces light up. 

Mr. Schleiff, you enjoy doing jigsaw puzzles. Does this talent help you in everyday life?

Schleiff: People around me know that I appreciate a dynamic environment and that I want to implement new things quickly and move them forward – I'm said to be impatient (laughs). Doing jigsaw puzzles helps me relax in my free time. The main lesson is: Some things simply take time. You have to look at all the pieces patiently and ask yourself where each piece might fit. At the same time, this type of approach is also central to my work. I am constantly asking myself how this part can fit with that part and how they can yield a bigger picture that is ultimately more than the sum of its parts.

What secret gift helps you in your work, Mr. Schütte?

Schütte: Without wanting to sound presumptuous: Empathy. I enjoy meeting people and hearing about what ignites their enthusiasm. I then ask what can we do as a foundation to keep that flame burning?