Research Staff Policy Forum 26th January 2010 A Report on Progress Professor Terry Threadgold Pro-Vice Chancellor for Staff and Diversity

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

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 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 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 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.