what is important from what is obscure. The rule of deference is also
voided when more than one person claims expertise.^34 As we will see
in Chapter 6, this situation creates a challenge for the evaluation of
truly interdisciplinary proposals, where multiple panelists can legiti-
mately claim relevant expertise.
As noted earlier, respecting other panelists’ opinions is an essential
quality of a good panelist. Being respectful upholds the customary
rule of collegiality. The comments of an anthropologist reveal the re-
sentment that violations of this rule can generate. Describing a con-
flict over whether some proposals were eligible, he explains:
I had a disagreement [with another panelist] near the start...I
was a little taken aback because his response to me on that was
very direct and kind of in your face. I found it...offensiveisa
little too strong, but I thought it was inappropriate, I guess. It
came at a time very early in the panel where everybody’s still sort
of feeling one another out. It made me a bit uncomfortable.Breaches of collegiality can go beyond creating discomfort. They
can result in open conflict, as the following description of a panelist
who was unable to convince others to fund a proposal in his own
field shows:
He ate by himself, as we broke after that [discussion]...Hewas
extraordinarily upset. It took until pretty close to the end of the
meetingforhimto...getbackintotheswingofthings...This
was his top proposal that I recall, and so he had a huge stake in
this. He couldn’t get anywhere with any other members of the
committee...Hedidnothear the criticisms that we were offer-
ing and they were quite substantive and detailed...Therewasa
kind of an undertone that [he thought] we really weren’t up to his
speed on this.Pragmatic Fairness / 139