“We cannot do science for its own sake. We must have the courage to change the world.” Interview with the new Dean of the BUT Faculty of Chemistry
Speeding up the faculty’s evolution, embracing greater ambitions and stepping out of the comfort zone. The new Dean of the BUT Faculty of Chemistry, Stanislav Obruča, talks about the need for clearly profiled research, the modernisation of study programmes and more open communication within the faculty. He emphasises that it is not enough simply to “be in the game” – we need to score goals, take responsibility and have the courage to aim higher. In the interview, he explains why he accepted the challenge of leading the faculty, what he approaches with respect, and why, in his view, science without an ethical foundation loses its meaning.
What is the main vision you are bringing into your role as Dean of the BUT Faculty of Chemistry?
If I had to define one main vision, it would be the need to accelerate the faculty’s evolution. In principle, we may be heading in the right direction, but we are moving far too slowly. The world is fast, and we should speed up as well. There are many areas where progress is needed. These can be divided into three basic pillars on which the academic community stands: science and research, teaching, and the university’s third role.
In science and research, we need better organisation. We need to define what we want, pursue it, and take responsibility for what we do. We should aim to score points and goals, not just stay in the game. As for teaching, we should realise that our study programmes, originally designed in the 1990s as five-year programmes, are no longer up to date. They need to be redesigned to better reflect the needs of today’s students, employers, and academics. As they are currently structured, they represent an outdated concept that has gradually become, to some extent, ineffective.
And the third role? I believe our path is to become a natural authority in chemistry – not only in the region but across the Czech Republic. Of course, we already are, but I think there is still a lot of room to strengthen this position. That, in turn, will attract students and support our research. Ultimately, everything is interconnected. Science gives us the competence to teach, because we truly understand our field and have hands-on experience. At the same time, science has a strong overlap with the university’s third role – it provides inspiration and topics we communicate to the public.
What personally motivated you to apply for the position of Dean?
That is a good question, and many people have asked me the same. It was not an idea that emerged last year; the situation had been developing for a long time. There were two main reasons. First, I perceived a need for change at our faculty. As I mentioned earlier, I felt that although we might be heading in the right direction, we need to move faster. At times, I felt frustrated when trying to push changes that were not progressing. I wanted to play more for the team and become a more important player. So I gave it a try.
The second reason was more personal. I have long been active as a researcher and teacher, but these activities tend to repeat themselves over time. At a certain point, one may start repeating oneself. I felt the need for a change, to start doing something different from just teaching, publishing, and working on projects. I believe that from time to time, one should step out of their bubble and try something new.
Where would you like to see the faculty in four years?
As Martin Weiter used to say, a faculty is a community of people. I would like the faculty to remain a pleasant place for people. A place where they feel comfortable and can realise their visions, whether they are academic or non-academic staff. A place where their work is fulfilling and enjoyable. Work does not have to be just a job; it can also be a calling, and that is a great gift.
In science, I would like our faculty to be successful and built on clearly defined themes that shape its identity. When a particular topic is mentioned, I would like one of the first associations to be, “That’s done at the Faculty of Chemistry.” I would very much like us to achieve excellent results and publish in journals such as Nature and other prestigious outlets. I believe we are close, but we lack greater ambition. In applied research, I would like to see our own spin-offs and outputs clearly associated with the faculty.
As for teaching, my vision is to have students who are satisfied with how and what they study, as well as teachers who enjoy teaching what they want to teach. This is, of course, an ambitious goal and probably not something that can be fully achieved within four years. Many processes have strong inertia and will change only gradually. It is more of a long-distance run.
What do you see as the biggest challenges and opportunities?
In teaching, a major challenge is adapting to the changes brought by today’s world – whether in terms of student expectations, employer needs, or technological development. Given that our programmes are, to some extent, rooted in the 1990s, we respond to these changes only slowly or inflexibly. At the same time, this is also an opportunity, because it is a concrete area we can change if we acknowledge the need.
I believe we are truly good at many things, but sometimes we are hesitant to admit it and present ourselves as real authorities. At the same time, we should open ourselves more to the world. Some topics may already be somewhat exhausted, and we are starting to repeat ourselves. We need new ideas and approaches. And we should be open not only to these visions but also to new people, including those from abroad, who naturally bring fresh perspectives.
What priorities do you want to address first?
Our very first task is to formulate a strategic plan for the next five years and a corresponding implementation plan. On one hand, it is a challenging task, but on the other, it is a good starting point – to clearly define where we want to go. Among the longer-term priorities is the internal restructuring of science and research at the level of research groups. We need to better describe the current state, allow research groups that may already exist to be formally established, and possibly dissolve those that exist only historically. This is a challenge we have already begun to address. We also face a complex discussion about study programmes.
How should the faculty respond to rapid technological development, for example in digitalisation or artificial intelligence?
I often hear the common sentiment that things used to be better and that today’s situation is not as good. I once discussed this with one of our professors, who argued that today’s students are not what they used to be – that in his time, students could solve complex problems using a slide rule, something today’s students would not manage. But I am not sure that is the right perspective. In my view, people in every generation are on average equally capable and intelligent. The difference is that today’s student can solve that complex problem in five minutes using a computer. Is that better or worse? It may have its pros and cons, but the reality is simply different. If we placed past students in front of today’s complex problems, they might struggle, while today’s generation could handle them easily thanks to modern tools. If each generation were less capable than the previous one, humanity would not progress. Yet we continue to advance, both technically and scientifically. The question is where to – but that is a more complex issue.
How do you plan to strengthen the faculty’s international standing?
Considering our size, the faculty is doing quite well. We have areas where we rank among the top in Europe and are well recognised. However, I believe further strengthening lies in greater openness. We should not be afraid to bring in people from abroad and also send more of our own people out. If we have more colleagues who have worked at major European institutions, we will also strengthen our position through their personal networks.
At the same time, we return to a theme already mentioned – healthy self-confidence and ambition. We have the skills and tools, but what we sometimes lack is the courage to aim higher. This was also confirmed by last year’s international evaluation panel. The experts essentially told us the same: you have excellent projects, interesting topics, and strong results, but what limits your growth is not a lack of equipment or skills, but your ambition.
We tend to stay in our comfort zone. Instead of submitting a paper first to the most prestigious journal, we choose a safer route and send it somewhere we have already succeeded before. The same applies to large international projects. But the safe path does not move us forward. If we want to grow, we must set more ambitious goals.
Which research areas do you consider strategic for the faculty’s future development?
That is a good question. I would say all successful ones. However, I do not believe that leadership should dictate research topics from above. Science should emerge from the bottom up. We observe what people are doing and what they excel at – and those strengths naturally become strategic areas. It does not make sense to declare from above that “we will all focus on this now” and hope to become good at it.
If I were to name one area where we have strong potential and already have something to say, it would be circular chemistry and circular technologies. This is, in my view, a common thread running across many research groups, institutes, and individual researchers. We are capable of thinking about how to use resources efficiently and how to utilise waste or previously unused raw materials.
This is a topic we should embrace strategically across the entire university. We must prepare for future challenges, because this need will persist. Resources will never be infinite, and their efficient use will always be a major issue. That said, it is certainly not the only area. Many others should grow as well – but again, these should come from the people themselves, not from leadership.
How do you want to support young researchers and PhD students?
In my view, for a researcher to grow, they need several key ingredients. First, resources – which we currently have at the faculty, both financial and in terms of research infrastructure. They must also be given the opportunity to realise their own vision and take responsibility for it. Without these ingredients, no one will progress, whether a young researcher, a PhD student, or an experienced scientist. I believe this is the essence we already have at the faculty and are prepared for.
What should a graduate of the BUT Faculty of Chemistry be like – professionally and personally?
Our faculty has a somewhat specific position in that we do not have a single dominant company, such as a refinery or chemical plant, where most graduates would go. Our role is to educate chemists for a wide range of companies and institutions. Chemistry is everywhere – in every manufacturing field and many theoretical disciplines. Various types of companies need chemists.
We should therefore provide students with a broad perspective so they understand the field in context, as well as strong technical competencies. Working with data and critical thinking are more important than knowing a single specific technological process. A good engineer must have a solid general foundation and be flexible. Students must understand that things change very quickly today, and I believe most of them already realise this.
And the human aspect? For me, ethical grounding is absolutely essential. Especially in science – if it becomes purely instrumental, it turns into an empty and unnecessary activity that society could easily do without. Science should always carry a vision and an ambition to truly change the world. It may sound lofty, but it is very real.
What was your first step in the role of Dean?
Coming up with a vision is not easy, but communicating and implementing it is even harder. My first step was to begin communicating the need for internal restructuring of science and research. Although the basic idea may seem sound and no one has anything to lose, I find that people can see many risks and feel they might lose something. Specifically, this concerns replacing the laboratory structure of the Materials Research Centre with research groups.
I try to explain that there is nothing to fear. We are not only creating space, but also assigning responsibility – and the two go hand in hand. Without responsibility, it is like a game where goals are not counted – and such a game is pointless. If we want our team to be the best, we must play to the fullest.
Perhaps I am too much of an optimist or idealist, but I believe these concerns must be overcome. Academics are strong personalities. They have to be, to push the boundaries of knowledge and do things no one has done before. But at the same time, they are often deeply convinced of their own views, which makes it harder to become part of a system we are trying to reshape. My role is to talk to them and explain that change makes sense.
What leadership style is closest to you?
I have always tried to be an important player. I often use football analogies because I used to play and that environment shaped me. A sports team is fascinating in that everyone strives to be the best and win, yet you are part of a collective and must deal with the fact that your teammate competitor might also be your best friend. I still draw a lot from that experience.
My style is not to be an all-knowing dictator who claims to have the only correct solution. Rather, I try to be someone who listens and seeks balance among all elements of the team. At the same time, I know that endless discussions lead nowhere. At a certain point, decisions must be made and pursued, even if they are not comfortable for everyone at the moment.
How do you want to improve communication within the faculty?
For me, communication has two aspects – formal and informal. We have official communication channels that exist and function, but information often does not reach the people it was originally intended for. This may be because people perceive it as something coming “from above” that does not concern them. I would like people to understand that, given we are a relatively small faculty, what concerns the leadership concerns them as well. Tasks passed down are not arbitrary; they have broader significance and directly affect how we all work in labs, offices, and teaching.
At the same time, the informal side of communication works very well here. We are, to a large extent, a close-knit community of people who like each other. At least that is how I perceive it. I have always had great friends at the faculty. This is a strong foundation we can build on. Even students themselves say that the friendly, almost family-like atmosphere is our competitive advantage – and I believe that is true.
How did you assemble your team of Vice-Deans?
We decided to continue with a structure broadly similar to the previous one. It reflects what I mentioned earlier – not a revolution, but evolution. We want to build on many existing elements. Therefore, Vice-Dean for Science and Research Prof. Martin Vala continues in his role, as does Vice-Dean for Studies Assoc. Prof. Michaela Vašinová Galiová and Vice-Dean for Doctoral Studies Dr. Jiří Smilek.
The only change concerns development. As I mentioned, we need visions, but we also need to implement them. That is why I approached Assoc. Prof. Petr Sedláček for the position of Vice-Dean for Strategy and Development. We have long worked well together. We share many views, and even when we disagree, we can communicate openly. This is our strength – the ability to move things forward quickly together.
How do you want to support collaboration across departments?
Let me return to a football analogy and a bit of history. I remember that when the Materials Research Centre was established, I gave a lecture on why it is important to pass the ball to players from other teams. It was about how collaboration creates results and value that would otherwise never exist. It is true that you then have to share the outcome, which may not always be comfortable, but without collaboration, you would likely not have it at all. This is something we need to understand.
I believe this spirit still exists at our faculty. At the same time, I am aware that it cannot be enforced through regulations or directives. It must be a natural principle. We need to support it through interaction and communication, but above all by identifying shared topics that connect us. In science, unlike in sport, there is not just one winner. There can be many. The rules are not as strictly defined, and much depends on how we define our goals. Competition does not have to be so sharp if we realise we share a common objective and should pull in the same direction. Otherwise, we all lose.
Is there anything you feel the greatest respect for in your new role?
I feel respect for many things. I have never held such a high position before, so I feel a strong sense of responsibility to perform it well throughout my term. I will do my utmost. A major challenge is whether I can not only formulate my ideas but also communicate them clearly and bring them to life. I would very much like my term not to be just about maintaining operations, but about genuine improvement in key areas. I know not everything will succeed, but I would like the trajectory of our faculty to clearly move upward.
What does the BUT Faculty of Chemistry mean to you personally?
It means a great deal to me. First of all, it is my team. This is where I grew professionally, and when I first came to the faculty – and I will allow myself a slightly lofty note here – I did not care so much what exactly I would do, but I knew I wanted to do something that would improve the world. I wanted to develop technologies that would make the world a better place. To some extent, I have managed to do that, and our research is indeed heading in that direction.
I was very happy to meet people here who thought in a similar way. I found many friends, including lifelong ones, and I also met my wonderful wife here. I discovered a scientific topic that has defined me and continues to inspire me. At the same time, I found an institution that may need a bit of help. The faculty is one of the main pillars of my life. Of course, family and friends come first, but right after that, it is my most important thing – my greatest passion.
Will you remain active in research and teaching?
Definitely. If I gave that up, I would be giving up a part of myself. At the same time, it is clear that it will not be at the same intensity as before. In teaching, we will redistribute some responsibilities among younger colleagues. In research, my role has already shifted naturally. As one progresses in their career, they move away from the centre of daily routine work and are more involved at the beginning and the end – in shaping visions and finalising results. I hope I will always find time to think together with my team about where we are heading and to help finalise both partial and overall goals, such as publications and grant proposals. I have a very capable team around me that is ready to take over many of the detailed tasks.
How do you relax? There must be a lot of responsibilities in your new role – how do you clear your mind?
I spend most of my time with my children, which is great fun. They reliably distract me from work. Whether they make me happy or occasionally upset me, they are the best way to relax. When you come home, you have to switch off. You cannot work all the time. This is the first area that helps me regenerate and brings me joy. We also have friends we like to meet, play sports with, board games, and travel. Besides that, I have long-standing hobbies – football and music, especially playing the guitar. These have been constants in my life for almost thirty years.
And what are you most looking forward to in your new role?
I look forward to every day. It may sound overly optimistic, but that is genuinely how I feel. When I wake up in the morning, I think: “Yes, today will be interesting – we will deal with this and that, I will meet these people… and maybe something will work out.” Of course, during the day that enthusiasm sometimes fades a bit, because things do not always go as planned or as quickly as I would like. Sometimes it is simply more challenging than I expected. But then the next morning comes, and I look forward to it again. I am a great optimist in this regard, and I hope it lasts as long as possible.
Thank you for the interview, and we wish you plenty of strength and many winning goals for our faculty in your new role!
Lucie Vítámvásová
Jana Otoupalíková
| Published | |
|---|---|
| Link | https://www.fch.vut.cz/en//f96620/d326925 |