When the University last November rejected a minority interest in a recombinant DNA firm in which Mark S. Ptashne, professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, would play a lending role, President Bok noted that Harvard might find its "integrity hurt by the appearance of conflict between academic and financial interests."

By steering clear of the venture with Ptashne, the University as a whole cushioned itself, for the time being, against the potential risks of turning knowledge into dollars in the commercial world. But members of the University community have been using their particular expertise to make a buck for several years. In 1974, when harvard rejected participation in a public works project in Saudi Arabia because the government wanted to exclude Jewish emplyees, for example, two professors went ahead to consult on their own with the Saudis. While the Ptashne affair dealt directly with the question of University involvement with the outside world, it resulted in refocusing attention on outside activities of individual professors.

The professor who complements his University work with outside consulting is not a new phenomenon. Chemists have played advisory roles for the government and industry since World War I, as have economists. But following World War II, the amount of consulting grew. The government began seeking non-military advice from scientists, domestic and international advice from economists and political scientists. The increasingly technical nature of the business world opened up opportunities for academics in the private sector as well.

As the amount of time professors spent doing outside work increased, so did concern that the University would be adversely affected. In 1955, former President Nathan M. Pusey '28 felt compelled to reiterate the purpose of the University:

There is a new need to recognize that though universities have a concern and a responsibility toward the everyday world their primary, their fundamental responsibility lies totally elsewhere. This is for basic investigation, for the pursuit of learning almost for learning's own sake, for poetry and for vision, and then from this kind of experience for the provision within society of a critically constructive force.

No one is sure how widespread consulting is today or if it has increased over the last decade because often a professor's consulting activities overlap with his University duties. In addition, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences has no monitoring system to log how much time its members spend consulting. Professors often feel sensitive about the subject and rarely discuss it. Ptashne, for example, refuses to comment on his work for Genetics Institute. "It's something you don't discuss much. There's a feeling that it's not your business," Richard J. Zeckhauser, professor of Political Economy and chairman of the Kennedy School Research Committee, says.

While it is difficult to make generalizations about the University as a whole, it is possible to identify trends in specific fields. The amount of consulting depends on demand. Academics who offer political expertise find that their opportunities depend on the success of their particular political persuasion. "Harvard professors were quite actively involved in the early '60s when a local boy was president," Richard E. Neustadt, Littauer Professor of Public Administration, who worked in the State Department during the Johnson years, notes, adding that "different candidates tend to have different experts on whom they tend to depend." Economits never seem to have trouble finding work to fill their spare time.

The biggest consulting boom has been in biology. The great strides made in recom- binant DNA research have recently opened up opportunities in the one science where there has traditionally not been a commercial market for discoveries. As Robert Albert, dean of the School of Sciences at MIT, puts it, "Biologists are now dealing with something which engineers have lived with for 50 years." Now, many specialists agree that biologists will be spending more time outside the University in the coming years.

Professors say consulting aids their professional development as a means for keeping up with what's new in the field. "A professor brings back that expertise to his classes," a Division of Applied Sciences professor says. "If somebody spends a week at IBM, that person usually learns more about superconductivity than after spending a week here," he adds. For those studying government, consulting has almost become a necessity, providing what Neustadt calls "windows on data." He explains, "It's a form of quasi-academic study, a way to get at information I could never get any other way."

Except in government, where pay is usually limited to compensation for expenses, money plays a role in the amount of consulting a professor does. John Kenneth Galbraith, Warburg Professor of Economics looks cynically at those who explain their outside activities in non-monetary terms, identifying "an element of special pleading" in such an argument to "justify the type of activity they do." Professors don't like to discuss financial specifics, except to acknowledge that the pay is good enough to attract people. In economics, for example, consulting can bring in as much as $200 an hour, and one member of the department says that some of his colleagues earn as much as half of their incomes by doing non-University work. In 1975, it was estimated that a Business School professor could easily rake in $10,000 annually from just 20 days on the road. But most feel that the monetary incentives are often overstressed. "Do you like to eat to keep from starving or because you like eating?" one professor asks. "If a person's primary interest were pecuniary, he wouldn't be a professor in the first place," Albert Carnesdale argues.

Harvard professors do more than their share of consulting in comparison to professors at other universities. One reason is Harvard's high level of prestige: whether a professor is truly qualified to advise on a certain topic, the Harvard seal of tenure is usually enough to earn him outside respect. "If I'm testifying in court, 50 per cent of the reason they listen to me is because I'm a Harvard professor," Zeckhauser says.

The University is responsible for much of the increase in consulting according to some professors, because it pays less than many other schools, knowing that faculty members always have the outside option. "Over the decades, Harvard salaries have lagged behind other places. Because of the prestige, there's the expectation that you will convert it into the coin outside," Zvi Griliches, chairman of the Economics Department says.

The University does accrue benefits while its faculty members are pursuing their self-interest. One professor of Biochemistry said his ability as a professor increased tremendously because of his contact with the "outside world." In general, faculty members say that when they consult, they keep abreast of new developments, so the university as a whole is much better off academically.

But what good is a well-informed professor if he is never around for students to speak with? Otto Eckstein, Warburg Professor of Economics, who set up Data Resources Inc. and adopted half-time status in 1973 to work at the firm, acknowldges the tradeoff involved when a professor consults. "There is a loss; professors are not as findable," he says.

It is difficult to measure the amount of time that students lose because their professors are in Washington. In the economics department, the faculty-student ration can be a cause for concern, Griliches argues, explaining that some students in the department complain that they have problems reaching faculty members. But students can also take advantage of their professors' activities. Jonathan A. Berman '81 says that he has worked closely with his Kennedy School thesis advisor at the firm where the professor has been consulting and that he will be working there next year.