Has the ‘great resignation’ hit academia? National Innovation Needed

I came across an interesting article Has the ‘great resignation’ hit academia? It appears that many scientist and educators are leaving universities for private business that pays much more. While I do understand their reasoning one must also consider the need to retain such talent within the university systems and enhance their purpose. Without university research we are unlikely to be able to succeed in national development. 

Research is grueling work and there is often few rewards for such efforts. While sometimes research is focused on smaller things like movement of ants they also can be focused on large things like national innovation systems. Red eyed in the wee hours of the morning when you have lots of other things to do isn't easy.

The process of innovation also needs to change. More of the information and research we find should be put into public used so that it can be adapted and changed. Sticking it within a stuffy journal no one reads isn't likely to be helpful (i.e. put in journal, put in paper, put in blogs, put in etc...Just keep the journal as the main deep source that businesses/people can pay for to get the details of the study. Good for them and good for everyone else. Probably increase their revenue.). I have a DBA so its all about finding industry application (Sometimes my research seems unimportant but it does have value and my someday be important. For example, developing a pool of research funds by cluster members designed to enhance a cluster system and the development of multiple cross industry fertilizations. That can be matched with participating governments, businesses and local stakeholders to ensure certain activities are occurring. i.e. finding small investors with some capital and connecting them with real estate, grants, banks, etc... and encouraging those investments that help larger local industries through improving the longevity and livability of an area. I know I know!!! Its stupid idea unless you came from an Ivy league university or are "connected" to key members of society in some way. We then wonder why we are struggling as a nation? 🤔 )

We might also change the structure of research by 1. ensuring more funding through industry-university collaboration and 2.) developing more broad use of research. 

In the first case researchers need more money, income, resources, staff and tools. Underfunded research that must fill out volumes of paperwork for pennies isn't going to help much. It slows everything down. (I volunteer firefight and have been fighting for a grass truck for every. Red tape everywhere!) Waiting, waiting, waiting......

Secondly, we should allow the data diggers to go deep but also have a place for generalists that can apply that research across broad areas. For example, taking something that seems useless like ant movement and then applying that to the development of human neighborhoods, cities, and purchasing patterns. Innovation isn't in a silo but does need someone to make the connected between things that don't seem to relate. See Generalist vs Specialist

We talk about being an innovative nation and then live by the same social, economic, and political structures. Why not change what makes sense? Perhaps we are just stuck in our old ways all the way to second best. At some point we should probably just stop talking if we don't really want to change things when we know some tweaks are likely helpful. 🤷