FIND InnoNuggets


Friday, January 18, 2008

Expiry date for PhD's

The article at Rediff is an interesting one. The Author proposes a 10-12 years shelf life of a PhD degree. So Dr. So & So, you became from today (10-12 years later) Mr. So&So as you didnt renewed your PhD.

Just to quote from the article,
So if publications, even in the best peer-reviewed journals, won't deliver foolproof results -- and this is all too evident in economics -- what is the way out for qualifications renewal? The US medical profession offers a good solution.

There, after every ten years, every doctor has to pass an examination which is of the most exacting standards. The idea is to make sure that the person has kept abreast of new developments."

My Suggestion is instead of PhD expiry, include what the scholar has done afterwards, so if he has published 5 peer-reviewed papers after grant of his PhD say in 1982 he should be allowed to append after his name So & So, PhD-1982/P5, if he hasnt produced any paper but written 2 Books, he should be called So & So, PhD-1982/B2 or if he has authored 1 book and 15 papers, he should be called So & So, PhD-1982/B1/P15. Well, I think we can go on and on....

Come to think of it, whats the real need to have PhD expiry. However I liked the last suggestion for Indian Adminstration Services expiry as mentioned in the article, " a PhD could 'expire', persons who on the dint of passing just one exam (like the IAS one) should not be required to pass more exams during their career. Imagine, someone who passed the IAS exam in 1972 can float along until one day he reaches the top policymaking posts merely because he didn't, along the way, severely piss off some boss. Indeed, that is the only requirement in government service to reach the top."

Just could not stop myself for commenting on this article. May be sometimes exploration of non-sense can lead to something interesting as well!

Structured Brainstorming from HBR

The article from HBR on Structure Brainstorming is an interesting one.

Although the article summarizes the process, it doesnt give anything that is not known - or practiced. Yet the way these articles get written and published seems to be consolidation of existing methods or literature.

Should not be taken as criticism of HBR, as I have found some really excellent papers and ideas over the years.

Yet .....

Word of Mouth Marketing

I have been studying various viral marketing, word of mouth marketing, idea diffusion, creating tipping point papers, lately. People are trying to build an explanation that I presume started with TIPPING POINT by Malcolm Gladwell in his mid 1990's book of the same name.

Recently researchers are talking about a measurement metric called Net Promoter Score. Although it is not standing the test of time as can be seen in the recent papers - especially in the Journal of Marketing paper.

It may be of interest for readers to explore some of the papers linked below

Net Promoter Score Under Fire

Value of different Customer Satisfaction studies

A very interesting collection of Net promoter score papers and discussions

More than 1000 pages tagged Word of Mouth Marketing

Is there a strategy for creating EFFECTIVE WOMM - just wondering?

My Book @Goodread

My GoodReads