Dealing with an exploitative co-author

Question

I have, unfortunately, ended up working with a truly awful co-author on three separate projects. The problem with this co-author is easy to summarise: he contributes almost nothing to the projects, and yet he wants to make all the decisions. As you can probably guess, he is fairly senior (and substantially more senior than me).

To give an example, let me tell you about the second project we worked on. The co-author played no role in coming up with the idea of the paper. He played no role in designing the experiment on which the paper is based. He did none of the data analysis, and also didn’t write the paper up. In fact, he only saw the paper well after it had been circulated for comments! His only ‘contribution’ has been to take the completed paper, and then make some (terrible) edits to the finished version, thereby making it slightly worse.

Given his lack of contribution, you might think that he would feel lucky to be listed as a co-author at all. Unfortunately (for me), he doesn’t exactly feel this way. Instead, he thinks that he gets to make all the important decisions, including the decision of where and when to publish the paper. Moreover, he decided that we need to run some extra experiments before he will ‘sign off’ the paper for submission. That was over a year ago — and we still haven’t submitted the paper.

I could you about the other projects, but the story is the same. He contributes nothing to the paper until it is finished, at which point he makes some terrible edits. He then thinks that he gets to decide on everything — including whether his terrible edits can be altered and (more importantly) when and where we submit the paper.

You might ask why I ever agreed to work with him. The answer is that my friend (who contributes a lot to the projects) persuaded me to — and this coauthor is my friend’s employer. This makes it very difficult to resolve the situation.

I should perhaps add that this co-author co-owns the data on which the experiments are based. I think this probably makes it impossible to remove him as a co-author on the papers. In fairness, one could also view this as his contribution to the projects (he co-owns the company that has been running the experiments).

I really need some advice about what to do. On the one hand, I want to tell him how I feel about what he has put me through over the last two years. I have also considered contacting my university (and his university) to escalate my complaints. On the other hand, I feel pretty powerless here. What he has done is not exactly plagiarism, and he does co-owns the data which we use in the papers. In addition, he is fairly well known and could retaliate by trying to sabotage my career.

I should also explain the very specific conflict we have currently. We have recently finished our third (and final) project together. He has done his usual thing of making some terrible edits, right at the end and once the paper is completed. I now want to submit. However, he wants to delay submission (he won’t give a timeline), mainly so he has more time to make edits. Hence the conflict.

Answer 1

I suggest that you do what is necessary to get to the end of this project, even if it is somewhat unsatisfactory and just move on. If they have made some "decisions" on the structure of the project/paper then they probably can claim authorship and can probably just demand it in any case.

I assume that you also have valid authorship and can't be removed. You could, yourself, refuse to permit the work to be published, but I don't recommend that (actually recommend against it).

You can't prevent what this person will do to your friend no matter your course of action.

But move toward the exits and salvage what you can from this burning edifice. Don't bother to complain to him. It won't help anything. If he tries to remove you and publish without your authorship you can then complain to the publisher.

Sadly, this isn't a unique situation.

Answer 2

This sounds very familiar. I once worked for a PI who behaved in a very similar way, down to the total lack of participation, the terrible edits, the arrogance, and the insistence on being in charge. In one case, the edits consisted of some wording rewrites and adding his name in various places in the author contributions where it didn't belong. He then finished off by sending us (his co-authors) a lecture on grammar by email.

The project I was working on (two of them) were both sort of derived from his "intellectual property". And I think one of the projects used data he provided.

I don't think I have much advice to offer except to say that it sounds like there is little if anything you can do about this. Your problem person realises, I'm sure, that he has leverage, and that there is little you can do. Also, based on my experience of academia, complaining will almost certainly be useless, and possibly worse than useless, if your co-author learns of it. Sorry.

I also imagine this sort of thing is not uncommon, at least with PIs dealing with his/her own students/postdocs. It might even be common. For obvious reasons, data about such things is hard to get. My experience on working in collaborative projects is that "senior" people are extremely disinclined to do any actual work on the project, though they are more than happy to have their name on it. My impression is that this is how (some) people get ahead in academia, by taking credit for other people's work. The capitalist analog is obvious.

Your case is different, in that you are dealing with a colleague's employer. The good news is that because this is the case, you can get away from it relatively easily.

I suggest finishing the project with him, if you can, and I also recommend that you avoid, if possible, starting new projects involving this person in the future. Because the stress is probably not worth it. You say you've worked on three different projects with this person. That seems like a lot, and I would avoid a fourth unless there is some truly compelling reason for it. Also, I would not stress about the unfinished project. It sounds like there is little you can do to speed it up without creating more friction, and it's probably not worth it. But don't withdraw from the project either. It sounds like it will probably move forward and get published eventually.

Answer 3

I have, unfortunately, ended up working with a truly awful co-author on three separate projects.

Well, that's the problem right there isn't it; that number is two too many.