1. Rosie Beales Research Careers and Diversity RCUK Strategy Unit Tel: 01793 444159 Rosie.beales@rcuk.ac.uk@rcuk.ac.uk http://www.rcuk.ac.uk

2. RCUK RCUK is the partnership of the UK’s seven Research Councils. Individual research missions, but common objectives. Working together as RCUK to: –maximise opportunities at subject interfaces, –forge new partnerships, –deliver major cross-disciplinary priority themes, –deliver an efficient service, –maximise impact of research.

3. Structure of the Research Councils The Research Councils are non- departmental public bodies They operate at arm’s length from Ministers – Haldane Principle Research decisions are taken by researchers Each Research Council is governed by a Council with membership drawn from a range of disciplines

4. ALLOCATIONS 2011 to 2014

5. Science Allocations – CSR 2010

6. Allocations by Council – CSR 2010

7. RCUK Strategic Vision (Introduction) Working as individual Research Councils and together as RCUK we: Provide leadership Shape the research landscape Incentivise collaboration and knowledge exchange Ensure that the UK gets maximum benefit Promote high level skills Develop and run the national research infrastructure

8. RCUK Strategic Vision (Research) “Promote high level skills b “Promote high level skills both for the sustainability of the UK research base and for the benefit of society and the economy”

9. Productive economy Digital economy Global uncertainties Healthy society Lifelong health and wellbeing Sustainable world Living with environmental change Energy Global food security Strategic Vision (Research to address societal challenges)

10. RCUK Strategic Vision - Research Funding people, funding projects Complement other funders’ approaches Establish the careers of the best early- career researchers Develop future research leaders for UK needs Balance the identification of excellent individuals against strategic considerations Build capabilities to address societal and economic challenges

11. RCUK Strategic Vision - Research Training for a highly-skilled workforce, economic growth and sustainability of the research base Attract the best into challenging and original research projects Ensure critical mass in strategic areas DTCs and approaches which deliver greater concentration and excellence. Emphasize high quality PhD provision in preference to support for taught masters courses Freeze minimum stipends at £13,590

12. RCUK Strategic Vision (IMPACT) IMPACT Increasing our economic and societal benefits Choosing our research priorities Embedding impact

14. Individual Research Council Delivery Plans 2011 -2015 All the plans include: Research and Training Priorities Cross Council Societal Challenges Impact (Economic, Societal and Cultural) Major Themes are: National Capability Focus on Strategic Research Critical Mass/Centres of Excellence Multidisciplinarity Collaboration

15. Skilled researchers for the wider economy and research capability Concentrate training in the best centres –High quality training environment –Cohort approach (Centres, BGP etc.) –Strategic research areas Focus training to deliver strategic skills needs for business, policy and research –Employability –Increase CASE awards –Development of collaboration and Engagement skills

16. Research Careers and Diversity We remain committed to the development of early-career researchers, both to develop the skills to benefit the wider economy and to ensure the continuing pipeline of excellent researchers for the Nation. As a result we will continue to invest in the RCUK Research Careers programme, continuing to support the implementation of the Concordat for Researcher Development and managing the transition of the Vitae programme towards a self-sustaining position.

17. Funding PGR funding in fees (14 July 2010 letter ) –in 2010 reporting most institutions mention a rise in fees Research Staff funding in indirect costs (3 Dec 2010 letter to Roberts contacts and 9 Dec 2010 letter to TRAC practitioners and Finance Directors). –plan now for cost recovery - new TRAC rate applies from 1 Feb Future RCUK monitoring will be related to monitoring the impact and operation of these arrangements

18. What might the process look like? 1) Institution decides what it wishes to deliver (and how) in respect of researcher development. 2) Institution determines the cost of delivering researcher development and builds this into its cost models for TRAC (and PGR fees) 3) Institution recovers Research Staff costs from funders For RCUK grants this will be through indirect costs For Charities/other funders – difficult to generalise – planned dialogue between RCUK and other Concordat signatories (ref: Principle 7) For industry etc. grants decision lies with the institution

19. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/

20. The Concordat consists of: A set of principles for the future support and management of research careers and, under each principle, an explanation of how it may best be embedded into institutional practice; A clear statement of the signatories’ collective expectations for the support and management of researchers. A section emphasising the responsibility of researchers to take control of their career and to further it through informed decisions.

21. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Contents A.Recruitment and Selection B.Recognition and Value C.Support and Career Development D.Researchers Responsibilities E.Diversity and Equality F.Implementation and Review

22. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ C.Support and Career Development Principle 3 Researchers are equipped and supported to be adaptable and flexible in an increasingly diverse, mobile, global research environment.

23. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ D.Researchers Responsibilities Principle 5 Individual researchers share the responsibility for and need to pro-actively engage in their own personal and career development, and life long learning.

24. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Implementation progress

25. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Implementation Raise awareness/maintain visibility: co-ordinator Promote and support HEI implementation oBuild on existing institutional events – staff conferences etc. oEnsure coverage of key research –led institutions Redeveloped CROS to support the Concordat Ensure links to the EU Charter and Code implementation Continue practice sharing: Database of practice, Researcher Development conferences, workshops

26. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Governance Strategy Group Terms of Reference (amongst other things): ooversee benchmarking study oensure implementation aligns UK with EU C&C oreport to UK Research Base Funders’ Forum Executive group

27. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Benchmarking Six Projects Understanding the research staff cohort Exploring the experiences CROS (Mar-May of research staff through 2009) HEI approaches to embedding career development for researchers in HEI strategies Reviewing the use of fixed term contracts Views and perceptions of principal investigators Funders response to the Concordat

28. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ CROS 2009: An analysis by discipline

29. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ CROS anonymously gathers data about working conditions, career aspirations and career development opportunities 2009 survey - 5908 responses from 51 HEIs employing 74% of UK Research Staff, 21% response rate AIM: To highlight similarities and differences between disciplines in CROS 2009 Breakdown of the aggregate results by broad disciplinary groups: Arts & humanities, Social sciences, Physical sciences and engineering, Biological sciences and Biomedical sciences.

30. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Messages from CROS 2009 The overall picture from CROS is positive oRecruitment processes are generally transparent; omost researchers feel valued; oinstitutions appear to recognise the importance of supporting career development Nevertheless there are variations and there are concerns. oInstitutions should identify areas of good practice and share these with the rest of the sector through the CROS and Vitae networks. Exchange of ideas will help researchers themselves and enhance their contribution to the UK’s research agenda.

31. 2. Demographic differences Physical sciences and engineering – predominantly male, younger (<35), more ethnically diverse Social sciences and Arts & Humanities – older, more part time * * * * *

32. 4. Trends in Arts & Humanities More part time workers (not related to gender or nature of contract) Interview, Induction and Appraisal Training and development Career preferences

33. 4.1 Interview, Induction and Appraisal > 1 in 4 not interviewed Induction process less informative Appraisals less prevalent: not related to eligibility or recent appointment

34. 4.3 Training preferences Arts & humanities have different preferences in modes of training and development particularly in comparison to Biomedical sciences

35. 4.4 Career preferences More interested in teaching as well as research

36. 5. Biological sciences trends 61% under 35 Highest number of fixed term contracts (90%) Differences in funding support Knowledge and understanding of policies, processes and initiatives CPD Experiences in work Integration and value

37. 5.1 Knowledge and understanding of policies, processes and initiatives Biological sciences respondents less aware of a range of processes and policies

38. 5.3 Experiences in work Biological sciences are less experienced in a range of work opportunities

39. 5.4 Integration and value Trend for biological sciences to feel less valued, recognised and equally treated Treated equally with lecturing staffAgree that institution recognises and values the contributions you make

40. Conclusions Despite differences in demographics and minor trends observed for some disciplines, essentially all researchers have very similar responses to CROS Most trends could be predicted in relation to disciplinary expectations Trend for less engagement in Biological sciences requires further investigation

41. Our vision is for excellence with impact; the UK to be as renowned for the impact of its research as it is for its excellence. This means continuing to invest in the best research, people and infrastructure; whilst aiming to enhance the impact of that funding on society.

42. RCUK Statement of Expectations We provide flexibility and autonomy to researchers and universities In return, these should maximise impact by: –Disseminating findings widely –Engaging with public and users and build networks –Exploiting results where appropriate –Ensuring that researchers and students develop skills to match career paths Peer review operational changes

43. Challenges in demonstrating impact Long gestation period for research Choice of metrics Outcomes tend to be highly skewed (“needle in a haystack”) Complex environment/multiple funding agencies Different stakeholder interests Attribution issues Collection of data

45. What do we know about impact? UK research makes a huge contribution to society and the economy: both UK and global impacts For the Research Councils we find: Diversity of impacts across portfolio Multiplicity of processes to achieve impact Both expected impacts and serendipity Impacts manifest at many scales: project, person, organisation etc Time lags and multiplier effects Researchers and research are enriched by impact However, considerable scope both to enhance the delivery of impact and to articulate both it’s potential impact and achievements more strongly

46. RCUK Impact Strategy Engaging Key Stakeholders: advance the rate of innovation from our investments by developing forward-looking relationships that identify and address the needs of users of research Maximising Research Impacts: increase impact from our investments by improving support mechanisms, as well as through evaluation, sharing best practice and communicating the benefits of our continued support of research, training and the provision of facilities. Delivering Highly Skilled People: drive innovation in knowledge exchange through enhancement of knowledge exchange skills in the research base and encourage movement of highly skilled people between the research base and user communities at all career stages.

47. Key Messages and Policies We want to encourage applicants to think about the potential impacts of their research and the resources required for knowledge exchange/impact activities from the outset. The primary criterion for RCUK funding remains excellent research. Beyond that there are a number of considerations to be taken into account, of which Pathways to Impact are one. RCUK reserve the right to withhold the award of grant until Pathways to Impact are of a standard appropriate for the project.

48. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ RCUK response Collective and individual External funding and institutes Linking career development to the grants process? Expectations/messages for PIs Central role of Vitae

49. http://www.researchconcordat.ac.uk/ Thank you for your attention!