It's true that a similar point could be made about grant writing skills too, of course.
This is really good. Far too many interviewers are terrible at interviewing, and far too many panels don't operate in an equitable manner. Some good steps being taken here.
Being interviewed is such a skill, and the improvements in performance between first and second (and often third) practice interview is dramatic. And that gives me real pause, 'cos the quality of the science has not changed one iota. But interview performance can be night and day.
The parallel with job interviews is an obvious one. I don't think the evidence shows that job interviews are a particularly good way of selecting the best candidate - if we're not very careful, we just end up recruiting the people who are best at being interviewed.
Noticed that university leaders often try to downplay swingeing cuts by telling media that they're "only proposals" and that "nothing is final".
Yes, that may be technically true (if we ignore preemptive course suspensions), but...
THESE ARE *YOUR* PROPOSALS, FOLKS. THEY'RE WHAT *YOU* WANT DO
"Don't worry too much, someone might yet stop us or change our minds. We're in full consultation with people and organistions who might do that."