Careers in Research Online Survey (CROS) 2011 Newcastle University CROS 2011 Summary Report

Transcription

1 Careers in Research Online Survey (CROS) 2011 Newcastle University CROS 2011 Summary Report Introduction CROS has been important in capturing the anonymous views and experiences of Newcastle research staff (RS) since It provides invaluable information which helps inform decisions relating to the University s strategy and framework of support for the management and development of RS. Continuing participation in CROS provides the opportunity to regularly review the impact and effectiveness of support initiatives and identify areas for further action. We can benchmark our results against the other 46 HEIs who took part in CROS 2011 and assess our position in implementing national initiatives such as the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers. CROS has provided evidence used by Newcastle University in gaining the European HR Excellence in Research award and will be useful in providing evidence for our submission on the research environment element of the Research Excellence Framework. Some key findings are summarised below together with recommendations for further improvement. Findings are presented in relation to the principles of the Concordat. Note: Throughout the document, where differences exist, Newcastle CROS 2009 results are shown in square brackets [x]; UK Aggregate CROS 2011 comparisons are shown as (UK x); if there are any differences between Faculties these are highlighted. Real demographics are shown as (actual x). Key outcomes and recommendations Positive outcomes: 1. Overall, our research staff generally had more positive views and experiences than in Newcastle benchmarks well against national data on implementing the Concordat. 3. Induction events are working well for more of our RS but we need to encourage them to take part. 4. Engagement in training and development is good and well received, although only 32% met the RCUK recommendation of at least 6 days per year on continuing professional development. 5. There has been an increase in the number of RS consulting professional advisers on careers and it is important to continue to provide appropriate support for different career pathways for RS. Recommendations: 6. Progress has been made with recruitment and selection processes but we could improve the number of panel interviews and information given out at the start of contract. 7. PDR is still not a regular occurrence for 26% of our RS (better in FMS than in SAgE and HaSS). We need to especially target new staff within their first contract and those on Fixed Term Contracts. 8. We need to promote awareness and use of institutional and national support initiatives such as the Research Staff Working Party, the University s RS Mentoring Scheme, the Concordat and Vitae. 9. We need to ensure that appropriate recognition of contribution is given, especially in the areas of grant writing and teaching and lecturing. 10. We need to address the concerns of our substantial number of RS with long service: some are still on a fixed term contract; half feel unfairly treated regarding promotion and progression. 1

2 Summary of results Overall 1. Our research staff generally had more positive views and experiences than in CROS 2009 perhaps reflecting the efforts by the university to continue to make improvements in most areas of support provision. 2. Newcastle results were comparable or better than the UK aggregate in most areas demonstrating that we are benchmarking well against implementing the Concordat. 3. The response rate of 44% was the best we have ever had, much higher than CROS 2009 [34%] and nationally (UK 25%). This was reflected across faculties: FMS 48% [39%], SAgE 39% [24%], HaSS 43% [39%]. Responders 1. We are confident that the results are representative of the Newcastle RS population (based on the good response rate, matching demographics and proportional representation across the university). 2. Most respondents were female 55% (actual 48%); faculty differences were observed (female FMS 65%, SAgE 28%, HaSS 71%) similar to those in Half of our RS have had 0-5yrs experience and 1-2 contracts at Newcastle, but there were a substantial number with long service, e.g. 28% had more than 10yrs experience in research, 16% have had more than 5 contracts. Recruitment and selection 1. Progress is being made with the University s revised HR policy for recruitment and selection of RS and guidance for PIs. There were improvements in information received at appointment (e.g. 72% [63%] received a job description). 78% had an interview for their current role and although the number having panel interview had increased, 47% [36%], there is room for improvement. 2. There is no change in the use of FTCs (73%) and there may be a concern for those with long service who are still on FTCs together with some evidence of shortening of contracts since We could improve the information received at the start of contract: 80% received information on probationary requirements and institutional policies and procedures, 75% received the institution's research strategy. 4. Despite increases in the uptake and usefulness in all levels of induction (e.g. local induction 73% [68%](UK 67%); 86% [72%] found it useful) we still need to encourage RS to take part. 2

3 Recognition and value 1. Recent efforts have been made for a full launch of PDR for RS within schools and institutes, yet CROS shows only small increases in numbers that have (a) had PDR in last 2yrs 74% [72%](UK 55%), and (b) find it useful overall 72% [68%](UK 62%). There were marked differences in PDR rate across faculties, FMS 81%, SAgE 66%, HaSS 48%. PDR rate was higher for RS affiliated with Research Centres 82% (71% outside RC) and those on open-ended contracts 93% (66% for those with FTC). We need to make sure new staff have PDR (rate for those in 1 st contract =58%). 2. Recognition for contributions still varies, examples for those with responsibilities in these areas were: publications 79%, grant applications 66%, teaching and lecturing 54%. Importantly there was no evidence for any reduction in perceived recognition for any activity compared to More 84% [77%] (UK 78%) felt integrated into their department's research community. Affiliation with a Research Centre improved the feeling of being integrated at institution and wider community level. Support and career development 1. More felt encouraged to engage in personal development 82% [73%] (UK 77%), but 27% [46%] still don t feel they have a clear career development plan. 89% [88%] have reflected on their development needs year career aspirations remained similar to 2009: 42% HEI research & teaching position [39%], 48% HEI research position [39%], 19% non-research career [17%] (multiple answers possible). It is important to provide appropriate support for these different career pathways. 65% would like help and advice on careers inside academia, 47% for careers outside academia. In recent years we have responded by improving development opportunities e.g. through the Career Pathway Scheme and Transitions Programme. 3. Many RS would like the opportunity for a placement (39%) or secondment (48%) and not many have experienced these (7%). 4. Most 84% had spent some time on Continuing Professional Development (CPD) in last 12months. RCUK recommend at least 6 days on CPD annually which was met by 32% of our RS % of respondents had participated in internal training activities at Newcastle in the last 12months. In every skills area where training had been undertaken 95% had found it useful. Areas to target future provision have been identified where nearly half of our RS said they would like to undertake training and development, namely Leadership & Management, Knowledge Transfer/Outreach, Career Management, Teaching and Personal Effectiveness. Other areas include grant writing and applying for a fellowship % said they would like to engage in coaching or mentoring. We need to promote the University s Mentoring Scheme for RS as half are unaware of it and 10% have used it. 3

4 Researcher s responsibilities 1. Understanding of institutional policies, processes and initiatives which support RS could be better, e.g. half are unsure of the detail on promotion, Institutional Research Strategy and redundancy & redeployment. 2. Consultation on long-term career planning and training needs remains mainly with their PI (69% and 77% respectively). However there has been a steady increase over the years in the number of RS who said they had directly consulted a careers adviser 33% [21% in 2009, 16% in 2006], perhaps reflecting our improved provision of professional advice (careers adviser, staff development advisers, and through the Career Pathways Scheme). 3. We need to promote awareness of national support initiatives [comparisons with CROS 2009 are difficult]. More of our RS are aware of the Concordat than nationally 84% (UK 57%), only 39% understand it (UK 22%); Vitae 61% (UK 50%) are aware, 21% understand (UK 19%); European HR Excellence in Research award 39% (UK 28%) but only 5% understand (UK 4%); RAE/REF 95% (UK 89%), 60% (UK 54%) understand. Newcastle s institutional support initiatives 1. Awareness of institutional support initiatives varies: Awareness of Research Staff Support Team provision varies with faculty: FMS 75%, SAgE 63%, HaSS 84%. 82% are aware of our RSS website but only 50% say they have used it. There was good awareness of RS workshops (63% have used them) and career advice but particularly low awareness of the Research Staff Working Party at 23%. 2. An interesting observation is with the 44% of RS who have an affiliation with a Research Centre (faculty differences: FMS 40%, SAgE 45%, HaSS 70%). These researchers seem to benefit from: a better chance of having an open-ended contract, 37% compared with 23% outside. a higher rate of PDR 82%, compared to 71% outside. an improved feeling of being integrated with the institution s research community (69% compared to 66%) and with the wider disciplinary community (74% level compared to 67%). Equality and diversity 1. Most felt they were treated equally compared to other staff in relation to access to training and development 92%. The responses were less positive for promotion/progression where 37% disagreed and this opinion of unfairness increased to 54% for RS with 5+contracts. 2. Half would like the opportunity to participate in departmental decisions/committees. 3. The institution s commitment to equality and diversity was recognised by 90% of responders. Implementation and review CROS helps us demonstrate where progress is being made on many of the Concordat principles and where more progress could be made. We can continue to analyse the rich data set and free text responses to review and monitor opinion to help steer our support initiatives and identify sub-group populations where perhaps tailored provision might be required. It is interesting to compare CROS results with other surveys. For the Newcastle Staff Survey 2010, where direct comparisons could be made, the results from both were aligned in the areas of PDR, 4

5 access to training and development, equality and diversity and work/life balance. CROS is supported this year by the Principal Investigators and Research Leaders Survey (PIRLS) which captures opinion on research leadership and management of research staff. Key outcomes and recommendations from CROS are reported to Staff Committee and University Research Committee (URC). Consideration should be given on how best to disseminate results to stakeholders for information and action. Conclusion CROS provides an important method for consultation with our research staff and nearly half have engaged with this opportunity. The many positive responses in CROS 2011 reflect Newcastle University s commitment to providing the support that researchers receive during their personal and career development. CROS gives us an opportunity to better understand the experiences and views of our research staff so that the framework of support can be led by the needs of the individual as much as the organisation. It is important that the recommendations are considered for take up by HR, the Research Staff Support Team, the Research Deans, locally through Institutes and Schools and also by researchers themselves so that we can further improve the support provided to research staff for their career development and management. Prepared by the Research Staff Support Team (October 2011) Report to Staff Committee and University Research Committee 5