research staff policy forum 26th january 2010 a report on progress professor terry threadgold...

Research Staff Policy Forum 26th January 2010

A Report on Progress

Professor Terry Threadgold Pro-Vice Chancellor for Staff and Diversity

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Focus

An overview of developments since the 2008 Research Staff Career Development Conference

Priorities Emerging from

• (1) our Concordat Benchmarking and

• (2) the 2009 Careers in Research Online Survey (CROS)



Consultation and Feedback

• It is important to note that where the benchmarking against the Concordat is concerned we can only make recommendations

• We therefore really need to consult you on these issues and

• To have your feedback • This is what today is about



CARDIFF UNIVERSITY STRATEGY

VISION We will be one of the world’s leading universities with an academic community recognised for its international distinction and impact

VALUES We value freedom of thought and intellectual curiosity We value excellence, innovation & contemporary relevance We support an ethical, open, and collaborative work ethos

We have a culture based on dignity, respect and courtesy We have a strong commitment to equality and diversity We encourage sustainability

PRIORITIES Academic excellence rooted in world-leading research and scholarship, with a current emphasis to increase the University's postgraduate community and to increase the University's international outreach and impact

OBJ ECTIVES

FOR OUR STUDENTS

An inspiring and enriching educational experience

Informed and led by world-leading

research and scholarship Recognised and well-regarded by

employers and professional bodies Built on a culture of excellence and

enhancement Includes a vibrant and growing

postgraduate community

FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE

World leading research and scholarship

Esteemed internationally for its

significance, originality and rigour Built on a strong disciplinary base which

supports multi-disciplinary groups A location of choice for the best

researchers and graduate students Acts as a magnet for international

research & development in Wales

FOR OUR COMMUNITIES

Creating global impact through our academic excellence

A catalyst for enhancing the economic and

social development of Wales and the UK Recognised as a centre of choice for

continuing and professional education Internationally acclaimed for informing

public policy and services Renowned for the value derived from

knowledge transfer and public engagement

PEOPLE and ORGANISATION Foster a supportive environment for all staff & students Nurture leadership, empowerment & development Recognise & value good performance Enhance staff & student communication Develop rapid & efficient processes Maintain good governance

PARTNERSHIPS and COMMUNITY Work with others to enhance our contributions locally as well as internationally Collaborate with world -leading people & organisations Maintain a lifelong relationship with alumni

ESTATES and INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE Develop distinctive physical & virtual environments that foster cohesion & excellence for staff, students & collaborators

Develop further an information infrastructure including 21st Century IT & library provision

ENABLERS

INVESTMENT Plan for sustainab le growth Make selective & prioritised investment

Fixed Term Contracts



The Concordat Says:

• Commitment by everyone involved to improving the stability of employment conditions for researchers and implementing and abiding by the principles and terms laid down in the Fixed Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations (2002) and Joint Negotiating Committee for Higher Education Staff (JNCHES) guidance on the use of fixed-term contracts will provide benefits for researchers, research managers, and their organisations.



Response: Working Group on the use of fixed term contracts

• Includes the University and Colleges Union, Unite and Unison in its membership

• Fixed term contracts are a legal form of employment and will continue to be used by the University where appropriate

• The Working Group is looking at how the University can move towards introducing open-ended contracts for staff currently employed on fixed term contracts.

• This includes research staff.



The Concordat Says:

• Organisational systems must be capable of supporting continuity of employment for researchers, such as funding between grants, other schemes for supporting time between grant funding, or systems for redeploying researchers within organisations where resources allow. Funders are expected to make it a priority to consider how their policies, guidance and funding can be enhanced to help employers to achieve this objective.



Response:

• The work of the Fixed Term Working Group will also include a review of the University’s redeployment policy.

However:• There are still relatively few large, long-term

funding streams that can support these principles.

• This is a point for funders and we will continue to argue this with them whenever we have the opportunity.



Pay, Grading and Progression



The Concordat Says:

• Researchers need to be offered opportunities to develop their own careers as well as having access to additional pay progression. Promotion opportunities should be transparent, effectively communicated and open to all staff. It is helpful if clear career frameworks for early stage researchers are outlined in organisational HR strategies.



What CROS 2009 tells us

• Sections 4.3 and 4.6 of the CROS report give us respondents’ views on the lack of parity in the treatment of research staff and lecturing staff with regard to opportunities for promotion;

• and sections 4.6 and 5.12 give us comments about the perceived absence of a clear career structure for research staff.



Response and Recommendation

• We acknowledge that this has been an issue of concern to our research staff for several years and remains unresolved

• The University’s researcher development strategy is designed precisely to deal with such issues

• It will need to include further consideration of the research career pathway and routes of progression for researchers



The Concordat Says:

• Researchers benefit from clear systems that help them to plan their career development. Employers and funding bodies should assist researchers to make informed choices about their career progression by ensuring that their own policies and processes for promotion and reward are transparent and clearly stated and that all researchers are aware of local and national career development strategies



Response

• Research staff do apply for re-grades and succeed (27/140 from Sept. 2007- Dec. 2009, 23 were successful)

• There are communication issues here• We need to do more work on raising

awareness of the way re-grading processes work

• The work on career pathways for research staff will also need to address this.



The Concordat Says:

• The level of pay or grade for researchers should be determined according to the requirements of the post, consistent with the pay and grading arrangements of the research organisation

And• Pay progression for researchers should be

transparent and in accordance with procedures agreed between the relevant trade unions and the employers nationally and locally. In HEIs, pay progression will be in accordance with the Framework Agreement, though recognising the flexibility that institutions have in implementing the Framework.



Recommendation

• Human Resources Division and RACDV need to work together in a more systematic way to provide early support to potential grant holders to ensure that new posts are costed at appropriate levels

and• to ensure that career development is taken into

account when existing members of research staff are named on grant applications

• The current economic climate will exacerbate existing financial pressures and tensions here.



Status of Research Staff



The Concordat Says:

• Employers are encouraged to value and afford equal treatment to all researchers, regardless of whether they are employed on a fixed term or similar contract. In particular, employers should ensure that the development of researchers is not undermined by instability of employment contracts. This approach should be embedded throughout all departmental structures and systems.



What Cros Tells Us:

• The results of CROS 2009 would suggest that we need to work harder at making sure that PIs and managers understand the terms and conditions of employment of research staff

In particular they should be aware that • Research staff are defined as ‘academic staff’ under

the University’s ordinances• Note: CROS 2009 (and the staff attitude survey

2008) tell us that communication of all kinds needs to be improved.This is a communication and a management training issue.



Research Managers



What the Concordat Says:

• Research managers should be required to participate in active performance management, including career development guidance, and supervision of those who work in their teams. Employers should ensure that research managers are made aware of, and understand their responsibilities for the management of researchers and should provide training opportunities, including equality and diversity training, to support research managers in doing this. Institutions will wish to consider how research managers’ performance in these areas is developed, assessed and rewarded, and how effectively this supports good research management.



The Concordat Benchmarking exercise will recommend that:

• We review the support available for research managers at all levels:

• In schools: research managers must be supported/made aware of their responsibilities.

How?• As a university wide priority: increase the

effectiveness of, and participation in, appraisal. This would include both research staff and PIs.

• Work on Leadership Standards: will help to ensure that PI appraisals routinely include a review of PIs as managers.



And in Addition

• Guidelines must be provided for all research managers/principal investigators as to what their responsibilities are and the structures in place to support them

• the existing training for research managers should be extended so that all those who manage research staff are required to attend a briefing session on their responsibilities



Positive Working Environment (PWE): Training and Guidance already in place

• PWE Building Management Capacity, Communication and Equality and Diversity Themes: all about organisational culture change.

• HERSHE Training and Development: e.g., Strategic Leadership and Management for HOS, Practical University Leadership and Management, Leadership and Management for PIS.

• Work on appraisal and building into it leadership and management capabilities and

• commitment to equality and diversity and health and safety as simply good practice.



PWE Initiatives Continued

Major initiatives: • Staff Attitude Survey and Action Plans• Mock IIP Assessment and Action plans• Athena Swan bronze Award and four silver applications (Optom,

SONMS, PGMDE and ENGIN)• equality impact assessment project in schools• communication strategy.• Equality and Diversity training paper• health and safety training and the Corporate Health Standard

performance management strategy• Equality and Diversity policy development and embedding

all with senior team leadership and support.

Training



The Concordat Says:

• Employers, funders and researchers recognise that researchers need to develop transferable skills, delivered through embedded training, in order to stay competitive in both internal and external job markets. Therefore, as well as the necessary training and appropriate skills, competencies and understanding to carry out a funded project, researchers also need support to develop the communication and other professional skills that they will need to be both effective researchers and highly-skilled professionals in whatever field they choose to enter.



Response: Feedback needed

• A great deal has been done here but• The Career Development Skills Programme for Research Staff

is funded by Roberts money, which is likely to cease in 2011. • The University’s researcher development strategy therefore

needs to make provision for sustainability beyond Roberts funding.

• This work is already under way but there are issues here.• Training is currently free but there is a low take up of

opportunities. Once the funding has to be found to keep it going, it could not be justified on the current figures. We need to know why the training is not being taken up: is it that people cannot get to it or is it that they do not want it?



The Concordat also Says:

• Employers and funders will wish to consider articulating the skills that should be developed at each stage of their staff development frameworks and should encourage researchers to acquire and practise those skills. For example, researchers may be given the opportunity to manage part of the budget for a project, or to act as a mentor or advisor to other researchers and students.



Response

• This work needs further development and will be informed by the UK wide Researcher Development Framework

• The University’s researcher development strategy will include further consideration of the research career pathway and routes of progression for researchers.

• Progress has been made on the Certificate in University Practice project, on bringing this together with the review of PCUTL, the review of graduate schools and the review of the graduate schools’ training provision post-Roberts. All of these things are in progress.



The Concordat Says

• Researchers should be empowered by having a realistic understanding of, and information about, their own career development and career direction options as well as taking personal responsibility for their choices at the appropriate times. Employers should introduce appraisal systems for all researchers for assessing their professional performance on a regular basis and in a transparent manner. It is important that researchers have access to honest and transparent advice on their prospects for success in their preferred career.



What Cros tells us

• Section 5.2: respondents’ experiences of probation and appraisal. Feedback is very mixed.

• There are four areas where respondents who thought that the appraisal process is not very, or at all, useful outnumbered those who thought it was useful or very useful;

• in leading to training and development opportunities (81:76); • in leading to changes in work practices (104:41); • for finding solutions to problems 94:58);• and in helping respondents to focus on their career aspirations

and how these are met by their current role (88:68).



Response and Recommendation

• The work on appraisal discussed earlier aimed at Improving participation in, and increased effectiveness of, appraisal



The Concordat Says

• Mentoring arrangements should be supported by employers as a key mechanism for career development and enhancement.



Response

• Research staff on probation have access to independent mentors and there is anecdotal evidence to suggest that some of these mentoring relationships continue beyond the probation period and could be so extended.

• The University added a question on mentoring to the core set of questions in CROS 2009. Results regarding the demand for a mentoring programme were mixed (see CROS 2009 Report).



Recommendation

• It is recommended that the University’s engagement with the Women’s University Mentoring Scheme (WUMS), and

• the development of mentoring schemes in those Schools which are currently working towards the ATHENA Swan silver award

• be monitored and assessed for their suitability as schemes that for staff on research-only contracts.



The Concordat says

• Employers and researchers can often benefit if researchers have an input into policy and practice through appropriate representation at staff meetings and on organisation or management committees.



Response

• Given the status of research staff as academic staff mentioned above, we believe that representation on relevant school and university level committees should simply be good practice.

• However, for input into committees, policy and practice at university level to work, there needs to be a community or network which wants representation and some way of maintaining that as individuals come and go.



My Question to you

• Is there an appetite for such a community/network?

• How could it work?• Do we need defined roles and

representatives? • Should we schedule meetings?• Would Lotus Connections be a virtual solution

to the two issues of (1) Communication with and to Research Staff and (2) Representation of and for Research Staff.



Communications Strategy (Staff)

• How can we make communication with you and from you - as a community - work?

• I need advice on how best to answer that question so that the strategy the Staff Communication Strategy group is developing includes you and gives you voice.



research staff policy forum 26th january 2010 a report on progress professor terry threadgold...

Documents

progression slide

diversity slide

treatment of research

lecturing staff

use of fixed term contracts

research staff policy

research managers

redeploying researchers