Yale Denies Tenure to Leading Social Inequality Researcher Michael Kraus
Michael Kraus is a generational researcher. Why didn't Yale want to keep him?
Psychologists from around the country expressed anger and dismay as Yale University denied tenure to one of the most prolific and inspirational scholars of his generation: Michael Kraus. Kraus has had a large effect on the fields of psychology and organizational behavior, helping to define the study of inequality. His research has been cited just over 10,500 times, over 7,000 times in the last five years. He has produced 62 academic articles and book chapters, including 51 since he received his PhD in 2010. His work has been widely discussed outside academia, having been covered by The New York Times, The Atlantic, National Public Radio, and FiveThirtyEight. He is also a widely admired mentor, launching a respected summer internship program in psychology and organizational behavior at Yale in 2017. This is to say nothing of his contributions to the field as a journal editor, serving of various committees at both his university and broader scientific societies, and serving as a research advisor to Congress, the United Nations, and a Presidential Task Force.
Kraus’ research has found that:
People from lower social classes are more generous, charitable, trusting, and helpful than those from higher social classes.
People from a lower social class are better at reading the internal states and emotions of others, as compared to those from a higher social class.
People can recognize others’ social class from just a brief one-minute video of their behavior, suggesting social class is communicated quickly and accurately from people’s non-verbal behavior.
People’s satisfaction in life is more closely related to how they perceive their status among those who they regularly spend time with face-to-face, as opposed to their status compared to society—or the world—more broadly.
Americans routinely overestimate people's ability to move up or down in social class--income and education.
Americans massively underestimate the racial wealth gap between black and white Americans.
These are just a handful of Kraus’ well-known results. He graduated in 2010, and his work was already being taught in my PhD program when I started in 2011.
It’s common to hear academics complain about how they are being pulled in too many directions to succeed. We’re meant to be good researchers, good teachers, good mentors, good public communicators, and helpful members of our department and profession. Most great professors fall down on at least some of these fronts, but Kraus was able to not just balance but excel at these competing demands. He served as a prototypical example of what it looks like to “do everything right.” That’s part of why it was so disheartening to see him denied tenure. It was like watching the Boston Red Sox pass on Willie Mays (a true story--Mays is now widely regarded as the best baseball player since Babe Ruth). If someone like this can’t count of success, what hope do the rest of us have?
For many, Kraus’ case cuts deeper. He is not only a talented researcher. He is also a voice advocating for greater diversity in the academy. Kraus routinely collaborates with, mentors, and promotes minority scholars. His research, especially his more recent research on Americans’ perceptions of racial inequality, also speak to the broader issues that minority communities face in this country. Given the importance of issues of race and inequality in the news in recent years, Yale took advantage of his role in shaping this conversation by frequently promoting his research. By repeatedly publishing important research on issues related to diversity, Kraus allowed Yale to project an image of being at the forefront of important social issues. Choosing to promote his work so frequently before tenure, but then denying him a permanent place on its faculty, makes Yale School of Management’s commitment to diversity feel performative and shallow.
On the heels of this announcement, another excellent scholar, Cesar Hidalgo, described his own denial of tenure at MIT years ago in similar terms. Hidalgo, the only Hispanic researcher in his department, had a similarly stellar track record: over 13,000 citations, publications in the most prestigious scientific journals in the world, and having completed two books. In an informal debriefing, Hidalgo reports that the president of MIT told him: “Look Cesar, the truth is that, if you are a mediocre researcher, but your department wants to keep you, they’ll find a way to keep you. And if you are a strong researcher, and your department wants to get rid of you, they’ll find a way to get rid of you.” From this, Hidalgo inferred that the president was trying to give him honest and helpful advice: "The president of MIT told me that tenure was not about research, productivity, or merit. It was about office politics & being liked by your department."
Michael Kraus will likely be snapped up by another university, eager to add his expertise, experience, and ability to build community to their department. Yet this decision sends a signal to many young scholars. Working hard to meet all the criteria set out for success cannot, actually, guarantee your success. Instead, politics play a prominent role, and anyone’s hard work can be derailed and set back through the actions of a few senior colleagues behind closed doors. The moral, like so much of Kraus’ own research, is that the systems we live in are less just than we expected them to be.