While delivering a lecture titled: “What are universities for?” at a European University Association Convention in 2009, Geoffrey Boulton, Vice-Principal of the University of Edinburgh, rightly said: “Changing a university is like moving a graveyard, you get no help from the people inside.” This implies that the analogy between reforming a university and moving a cemetery is meant to invoke the idea of how unusually, notoriously even, uncooperative university administration is when it comes to reform or change because it is believed to be sacrilegious. Thus, the institutional stakeholders do not create or sustain a conducive environment for the employees, particularly for the young and talented foreign qualified faculty members, and favourable conditions for innovation and development. Highly-spirited new faculty entrants – after having completed their doctoral studies at foreign universities, presenting their academic work at some of the renowned platforms of their disciplines, and publishing their research works in reputed international journals – return to Pakistan and join public sector universities to play their role in the advancement of academics. However, over time, their experiences develop into grievances. Their enthusiasm for reform, change, improvement, innovation, and development wipes out briskly. Subsequently, their talent gets buried like a dead body in the graveyard. Why are public sector universities considered as graveyards for, particularly young, talent? To begin with, high-spirited new faculty entrants plan for conducting research and academic workshops and seminars to share their knowledge, that they gain while studying in foreign universities, with research students of MPhil and PhD programs and their colleagues (mostly local graduates). However, their proposals are blocked offering lame excuses ie higher authorities would not allow to organise such activities; funds are not available (though funds are not required to organise such workshops and seminars at departmental level); and students, due to their personal and academic engagements, are not available to attend these events. However, the possible reason could be the insecurity of the senior faculty members from their junior colleagues. They might be afraid of their skills, talent, and the impact that they could create upon the students. This might expose their incompetence and leave an impression that the junior members are more talented and competent than those of the seniors. Thus, they try to discourage and dispirit the juniors by not letting them to organising such activities and engaging with the students of MPhil and PhD programs. Also, this deprives the students of learning new research techniques, skills, and methods. Secondly, MPhil and PhD students are discouraged to choose foreign qualified teachers, who are equipped with modern techniques and skills, as their research supervisors. Instead, they are directed to choose supervisors from among the senior faculty member only, who are mostly devoid of advanced research skills. For this purpose, various tactics are used—e.g. carrot and stick policy. For example, PhD students are offered to work as visiting lecturers in the department if they do comply with the directions, and threatened with failure if they refuse to do so. Along with this, senior students and visiting faculty members, who are mostly aligned with the senior teachers and administration of the department, are given the task to brainwash the junior students to achieve the desired goals. Thesis supervision is a crucial enterprise for foreign qualified faculty member not only because it is helpful in the transformation of foreign knowledge, skills, and abilities that stand out in highly ranked international universities to the younger generations but depriving an otherwise eligible and competent faculty member of such opportunities systemically suppresses the chances of their personal and professional growth. Thirdly, foreign qualified faculty members are denied teaching opportunities at MPhil and PhD classes for one reason or the other. In majority of the cases, three-four senior faculty members, who are generally the least skilled and old-fashioned, teach courses to both MPhil and PhD classes simultaneously by arguing that, being seniors, this is their right. Though there could be a possibility of teaching courses on rotation basis – ie senior faculty members can teach to PhD class and junior teachers may teach to MPhil class in the same semester while they may swap classes in the next semester – yet it is not done. In this way, both foreign qualified faculty members and MPhil and PhD students are deprived of engaging with one another. Lastly, the talent is buried and the energy is wasted by keeping the foreign qualified faculty members in fake complaints either against them or with their name against any other higher authority. For example, complaints are registered on Prime Minister’s Citizen Portal or applications are given to Governor or President (Chancellor of the university) with the name of young teachers – who even do not know about these applications – against Dean, Registrar, or Vice Chancellor of the university. This tactic is mainly used to turn the university authorities against the young faculty members, which may cause loss to the latter—eg, creating hurdles in their promotion, study leave, research projects, and what not. Moreover, instead of using their energy and talent for innovation and development, young teachers are compelled to spoil them in justifying their position—that they are not involved in these fake applications. To sum up, these are the general problems that the majority of the highly skilled young and foreign qualified faculty members face regularly. This lessens their enthusiasm and diminishes their energies to develop an academic and research competition environment. Resultantly, it causes brain drain because many of them move abroad for better opportunities. Immediate reforms within the universities are the need of hour to: 1) stop this brain drain; 2) save our educational institutions from destruction; and 3) stop letting public sector universities becoming graveyards for talent. The writer has a PhD in history from Shanghai University and is a lecturer at GCU, Faisalabad. He can be contacted at mazharabbasgondal87@gmail.com. He tweets at @MazharGondal87