Insert footer on Slide Master The emerging University Strategy puts our employees at the core of its mission To be one of the best research-intensive universities at which to study and work Key priority 5: Provide a working environment which enables us to recruit and retain the very best staff
Insert footer on Slide Master3 Working Together: A Strategy for Success outlines the plans to take this forward We aim to be not just an employer but to work in partnership with colleagues to foster a sense of community and achieve our objectives; We will enable supportive leadership, creating the conditions that allow colleagues to fulfill their potential within their roles and careers; We will encourage a challenging culture, enabling the University to respond in good time; We will deliver a staff experience that encourages commitment, loyalty and success, engaging with colleagues in a mature and meaningful way and listening to their responses, communicating clear and consistent expectations; We will celebrate success at all levels of the organisation, recognising and rewarding achievement at the earliest possible opportunity; and We will embrace diversity, recognising the many ways in which colleagues can contribute to the University’s growth, and removing barriers to success.
Insert footer on Slide Master4 Staff Survey Results The results of the staff survey demonstrated that around 45% of those who completed the survey found the SDR / Job Chat process useful: a) In reviewing my strengths and achievements; b) In providing constructive feedback on areas for development; and c) In helping me to improve/maintain my performance. In addition to this: 50% of those who completed the survey felt that good performance is recognised and appreciated within their School/Directorate; Whilst only 24% thought that poor performance was adequately dealt with.
Insert footer on Slide Master What do we want to achieve? Develop a new review process that: Support the University Strategies Addresses more firmly the feedback from the staff survey Provides greater value, meaning and purpose for staff Supports effective management and development of individuals
Insert footer on Slide Master What did we do? The details 5 discussion groups across all campuses During August attendees Mixed groups of staff 85% Administrative or Professional and Managerial What did we ask? Questions around purpose, value and practicalities
Insert footer on Slide Master What did we learn? Purpose of a review process Having dedicated time to focus on staff Differing views on links to job performance or career development focus dependant on role To show how you fit into the overall direction and focus of the University Managers require a process that supports a balanced discussion with an individual – not just about development Not the only time in the year to talk to staff
Insert footer on Slide Master Who should undertake the review There was broad agreement that whoever conducted the discussion should both understand what is being articulated and have some responsibility or accountability to change things. A number of individuals suggested that 360 o feedback could be really useful to obtain a balanced view. Some Academic staff still wanted the opportunity to have this discussion with someone independent.
Insert footer on Slide Master What can be discussed in a review? One clear message from this element of the discussion was that the desired purpose of the appraisal process varied depending on the experience of line management. Where there were regular and ongoing discussions the real value was in reflection and review and future objective setting. Where there was little management intervention then the appraisal process was one of the only routes to obtain feedback or to take time for self-reflection.
Insert footer on Slide Master What is the value in a review process? Doing it at the right time of year If the individual undertaking it can affect change If the training and development requirements are actioned Having objectives that clearly relate to the wider corporate priorities Mixed views on linking reward to reviews – not yet mature enough for this Having a structure that links to the purpose of your role Having consequences
Insert footer on Slide Master Some key questions 1.What does the University want from a review process? 2.What should the focus be? 3.Should we have the same system for all staff? 4.Who should the reviewer be? 5.Should there be a link to reward? 6.What should the level of confidentiality be? 7.Should it be mandatory? 8.Should we introduce the requirement of feedback from those you manage?