Reason for review

November 7, 2003

Your story "Contract sparks row over IP rights" ( THES , October 24) reported that I had announced a review of the Research Services Division at Cambridge University. What you didn't report was that this was the first part of a regular programme of such reviews, covering all aspects of the central administration.

Such programmes are an important part of the necessary dialogue between administrators as service providers and the academic community. The Cambridge administration has developed significantly over the past few years and, as I explained in announcing the reviews, we need to see what has been achieved and what needs to be done, and ensure that scarce resources are being properly used.

My administrative colleagues are committed, hard-working professionals who take pride in their work and look forward to having a constructive dialogue on these issues. They might have thought from your article that the review was associated with the intellectual property rights debate going on here.

It isn't.

Timothy Mead
Registary, University of Cambridge

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments