Careers in Research Online Survey 2013 Summary

Transcription

1 Careers in Research Online Survey 2013 Summary LSE participated in the 2013 Careers in Research Online Survey (CROS) throughout May, having previously taken part in 2006 and CROS's purpose is to provide information to enable LSE to review its policies and practices relating to researchers employment, training, career development, supervision, communication and other support processes. Since it was introduced in 2002, CROS has led to improvements in local staff review and appraisal systems, local induction processes and communication with salaried research staff. The feedback it has provided has led to additional funding to institutions for research staff development, as well as raising the profile of research staff within institutions and nationally. Over the same period the second (2008) Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers has been developed. The Concordat sets out the expectations and responsibilities of research staff, their managers, employers and funders in managing the career development of researchers. Its aim is to increase the attractiveness and sustainability of research careers in the UK and to improve the quantity, quality and impact of research for the benefit of UK society and the economy. Questions included in CROS 2013 covered aspects of research careers, recruitment and selection, recognition and value, support and career development, equality and diversity and issues relating specifically to LSE. Developments in support and training provision for LSE research staff Since the last CROS in 2009, and especially since the new Concordat in 2008, there have been a number of developments at LSE to support research staff, including: Establishment of the Research Staff Committee to oversee issues pertaining to research staff Establishment of research staff mentoring guidance Establishment of Annual Career Development Review Meetings for research staff Review of research staff Inductions Establishment of a School Bridging Fund for research staff Review of research staff contribution pay guidance Development of workshops for new Principal Investigators Publication of new School Guidance on Supporting and Managing Research Staff Uptake of support and training provision Uptake of research staff training provision at LSE has been positive since its introduction in 2004/05: Data suggests that significant numbers of research staff have taken part in one or more staff development events offered by the Teaching and Learning Centre between 2011 and In 2012/13 the Teaching and Learning Centre offered 31 events tailored for research, compared with 17 in 2008/09 and only 8 in 2005/06. The Academic and Professional Development Adviser is working on a regular basis with the Research Staff Association to address the professional development needs of research staff. Results from the Careers in Research Online Survey 2013 LSE participated in CROS 2013 along with 67 other institutions nationally. Survey response rate 42 of LSE's 166 salaried research staff participated in CROS a response rate of 25.3%. This figure is higher than the 2009 response rate of 21.9% and only slightly lower than the overall national response rate of 26.1%. Survey questions The survey consisted of two parts. The first was completed by salaried research staff in all institutions. This included questions about recruitment and selection, recognition and value, support and career development, equality and diversity. For these questions, we have been able to compare the LSE salaried research staff experience with the experiences of salaried research staff in other institutions. The second part was a set of LSE-specific questions which do not allow for comparison but which provide some useful institution-specific insights. Questions here included LSE salaried research staff s research team characteristics, working practices, attendance at meetings, opportunities to pursue a PhD, and post-contract career plans. Salaried research staff were also asked to rate their overall experience as a researcher at LSE.

2 Who responded to the LSE CROS 2013 Of the 42 respondents to the LSE CROS 2013: 68% were 35 years of age or younger 66% were non-uk 48% were female 53% indicated that they were working primarily on their own 81% were on fixed-term contracts 54% of those on fixed-term contracts had less than 12 months remaining on their current contracts 37% had a high expectation that their contract would be renewed 66% were on Salary Band 6 or below What do LSE salaried research staff think of their jobs? Figure 1: How do salaried research staff rate their experience of being a contract researcher at LSE (interyear comparison)? Other advantages mentioned included: 78% believe that their institution both recognises and values their contributions to publications 64% feel that their institution values their public engagement with research On the negative side, 55% of respondents do not feel that the School recognises and values their contribution to managing/supervising staff. In addition, opportunities for progression and promotion are an issue for salaried research staff: 53% believe that they are not treated equally when it comes to being promoted. A further 50% expressed their concern about opportunities to participate in decision-making processes. As one respondent put it: Ensure parity with career (teaching and research) staff. This [is] a major problem given the changeover in career grades that is currently being undertaken. Offer meaningful opportunities for promotion. (Promotion is currently only available if external funding exists. There is no top up from School for any additional work undertaken, such as teaching, citizenship, etc.) Ensure that research staff are not going to be unfairly penalised when it comes to the REF. And In many ways we are marginalised and the new, separate pay structure together with the already lacking support system will make this differential treatment even more palpable. When asked about their overall experience at LSE, 92% respondents replied good or very good. LSE salaried research staff appear to be satisfied with their jobs, although slightly less on average than in This question was asked only in the LSE survey, so we cannot compare this response with those of other institutions. Job satisfaction may be related in part to the quality of the relationship contract researchers have with their principal investigator (PI) or line manager. 84% indicated that this relationship is excellent/good, with the same percentage indicating that they meet regularly (at least monthly) with their PI. 92% stated that the support they received from their PI was excellent/good, while 60% rated their discussions with their PI about career development and skills/competencies as excellent/good. In all but the last indicator there has been significant improvement since What do salaried research staff particularly like and dislike about their jobs? At various points in the survey, salaried research staff were invited to give open-ended comments on the pros and cons of being a salaried researcher. On the positive side, 71% feel that their institution treats them equally with regards to access to training and development opportunities, while 64% believe that they have equal opportunities to attend conferences and external meetings. Recruitment and selection 26% of item respondents found out about their current posts by word of mouth rather than in newspapers or on websites. During the application process, most candidates had received a written job description along with details of the qualifications and specialist research skills required of the post-holder. 81% of respondents are employed on fixed-term contracts, with the remainder on open-ended contracts or unsure. 54% of respondents had less than 12 months remaining on their current contracts. 39% of LSE salaried research staff reported that they had not been offered a formal institution-wide induction. Given that induction should be universally available at LSE, it was disappointing to note that there has been no change in uptake since When offered, nearly all those who undertook induction programmes found them useful or very useful (see Figure 2). The results underline the importance of departmental and crossinstitutional induction programmes and the need to review how induction events are promoted within the School. New research staff at LSE are invited to orientation events run each September by the Teaching and Learning Centre. Research staff are also allocated a mentor via their Department/Research Centre and have Career Development Meetings scheduled in annually via the Department/Research Centre. 2

3 Figure 2: Usefulness of cross-institutional induction 61% of respondents said they had not received a departmental/faculty/unit induction, while 36% had not received a local induction to their current role. Recognition and value CROS 2013 sought to determine whether salaried research staff felt they were on an equal footing with permanent lecturing staff. It can be seen from Figure 3 that, in terms of opportunities for promotion and progression, there has been a deterioration in agreement ratings since 2006, despite improvement since Figure 3: Respondents agreeing that the institution has treated them on an equal footing with permanent academic staff (inter-year comparison) 1 Opportunities for promotion and progression 2 Participation in decision-making processes 3 Terms and conditions of employment 4 Access to training and development opportunities Figure 4 indicates that, since 2009, there has been a significant improvement in responses to requests from salaried research staff for flexible working. Where applicable, most CROS participants felt that LSE recognises and values the contributions they make in terms of: Publications (84%) Public engagement with research (77%) Knowledge transfer & commercial activities (74%) Managing budgets/resources (73%) Grant/funding applications (70%) Teaching and lecturing (61%) Peer reviewing (57%) Supervising research students (56%) Supervising/managing staff (45%) 61% feel integrated into their department s research, with 58% feeling integrated at institutional level. 66% of respondents consider themselves integrated into their wider disciplinary. Support and career development It is clear from Figure 3 that around 70% of respondents do not feel equally treated in terms of promotion and progression, with the figure being just under 60% for decision-making involvement. The 2013 CROS further requested opinions on equality of treatment with permanent staff on a range of other factors, summarised in Figure 4. Figure 4: Respondents agreeing that the institution has treated them on an equal footing with permanent academic staff (inter-year comparison) 1 Visibility of profile on website/directories 2 Opportunities to attend conferences/external meetings 3 Requests for flexible working Probation and appraisal The Concordat recognises that the short-term pressures of research projects can sometimes render as lower priority the long-term personal and career development of research staff. It therefore recommends that two appraisal meetings are scheduled: a Project Review Meeting, which concentrates on progress towards the specific research project goals, and a Development Review Meeting, which deals with wider career and personal development beyond the current project. A School framework for Annual Career Development Review Meetings for research staff was developed by the Research Staff Committee and is being implemented within the School. 55% of item respondents indicated that they had not participated in a staff appraisal/review over the past two years (or since taking up their current position), compared with only 40% nationally. LSE still lags behind other institutions in this respect. Of those who had been appraised, 17% of salaried research staff thought the process was not very useful or not at all useful, compared with 41% nationally. Most respondents regarded appraisals as effective in highlighting issues, focusing on career aspirations, identifying strengths and achievements, issues relating to 3

4 changes in work practices and reviewing personal progress. However, nearly half thought the process was not very useful in leading to training or other continuing professional development opportunities. Training and development opportunities LSE salaried research staff have open access to central programmes run by the Teaching and Learning Centre, Human Resources (Organisational and Lifelong Learning), the Library and Information Management and Technology (IMT). The programme offered by the Teaching and Learning Centre includes extensive support on teaching development. At LSE, 33% had not attended training or other continuing professional development activities in the last 12 months, compared with 9% in Nationally, the figure is 21%. LSE salaried research staff spent, on average, over 2.5 days on their continuing professional development over the past 12 months. This includes training, conference attendance, individual reflection, mentoring, etc. The survey offered research staff the opportunity to comment on the skills training they had undertaken and also to indicate where they would like further training in the future (see Figure 5). No additional topics were proposed by salaried research staff beyond those that were focused on specific research skills (e.g. use of specialist statistical packages) and languages. Figure 5: Areas of training and development that salaried research staff have usefully undertaken, or would like to 1 Research skills and techniques 2 Research impact 3 Career management 4 Knowledge exchange 5 Public engagement 6 Teaching or lecturing 7 Leadership and management 8 Supervision of doctoral/masters students 9 Communication and dissemination 10 Personal effectiveness 11 Collaboration and team-working 12 Ethical research conduct 13 Equality and diversity Unsurprisingly, salaried research staff are keen to have training on matters closely associated to their research activities and career management. 64% expressed no interest in training related to ethical research conduct, while for equality and diversity the figure is close to 70%. Half rejected collaboration and teamworking as having relevance to their research activities. Equality and diversity Overall 76% of respondents believed LSE is committed to equality and diversity, a lower response rate than 2009 (91%). 78% viewed their work-life balance positively, an increase from 2009 (61%). Asked about fair treatment regardless of personal characteristics such as age, ethnicity, disability or gender, 10% considered the recruitment and selection process to be unfair, 19% saw unfairness in career progression and promotion. 14% considered pay as unfair, which is a decrease of 4% since When asked if LSE treats its staff fairly irrespective of gender, 17% disagreed or strongly disagreed. Corresponding figures for other areas are: age (12%), disability (5%), ethnicity (7%), religion (5%) and sexual orientation (2%). On equality and diversity respondents comment: I seem to have no opportunity to take paid parental leave as a researcher in the UK; but this seems to be a UK wide issue. However, I think that this, effectively, impacts on the careers of women, as my wife has to do most of the work; so, in my view, families should be supported and not women. I don t think women are treated differently individually, but there are less women/ethnic minority staff in the School, and we need more positive measures to counteract that. I think some roles are gendered and those are often less recognised and rewarded. How LSE compares, on average, with other institutions in CROS The list below summarises how LSE fares in relation to other CROS-participating institutions for a range of factors. LSE is better than the total sample in terms of Recognition of salaried research staff contributions to: o Managing budgets/resources o Public engagement with research Institution treating staff equally in relation to: o Requests for flexible working LSE is the same as the total sample in terms of Recognition of salaried research staff contributions to: o Grant/funding applications o Knowledge transfer and commercialisation activities o Peer reviewing o Publications o Supervising research students o Teaching and lecturing Institution treating staff equally in relation to: o Opportunities to participate in decisionmaking processes o Opportunities for promotion and progression o Visibility on websites and staff directories Extent of agreement that salaried research staff are: 4

5 o Integrated into the wider disciplinary qualifications and academic contributions esp. among early career researchers (below senior research fellows). LSE is worse than the total sample in terms of Recognition of salaried research staff contributions to: o Supervising/managing staff Institution treating staff equally in relation to: o Access to training and development opportunities o Opportunities to attend conferences and external meetings o Terms and conditions of employment Extent of agreement that salaried research staff are: o Integrated into the department s research o Integrated into the institution s research Developments for 2013/14 In accordance with Principle 7 of the second (2008) Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers, LSE s Research Staff Committee (RSC) has been actively engaged in reviewing the School s provision for research staff, with a view to ensuring that the School offers the best possible working environment. The RSC held its first meeting in June Members include representatives from research staff, Principal Investigators, a union representative, Research Centre Directors, Heads of Department and Heads of Division to inform the direction of its work. The Committee membership also includes representation from the Co- Chairs of the Research Staff Association to maintain dialogue with the research staff and promote the regular exchange of ideas and views. It is important to be informed about the possibility of renewal in particular [ ] in the last 6 months of the contract. It is important to be transparent and clear about this. I add problems in understanding what was expected from me in terms of research topics to be covered when I started. The atmosphere and resources are great, and the quality of research and people are generally great. But there's... variation in coauthorship/management, and this leads to isolation of many junior staff when PIs/managers are bad. This is inefficient, dispiriting, and destroys careers. In my research group there are very few genuine teams - most senior staff want to work with just one RA/RO, and this also leads to isolation. A better structure would involve more horizontal links and more genuine team work. Key contacts Dr Sarabajaya Kumar, Academic and Professional Development Adviser: Research Students and Staff, Teaching and Learning Centre, room KSW.5.02, s.kumar3@lse.ac.uk Dr Liz Barnett, Director, Teaching and Learning Centre, room KSW.5.05, l.barnett@lse.ac.uk NB: This report draws on the raw data of previous CROS surveys for the comparative analysis. This is due to inconsistencies in the reporting of data in In October 2010, the RSC undertook a gap analysis and developed a two-year Action Plan identifying key areas that required further action from the School in order to ensure that during their employment at LSE it was supporting research staff. On 15 December 2010 the School was awarded the 'HR Excellence in Research' badge from the European Commission and Vitae. The School has been recognised for its efforts in improving the working conditions and career development opportunities for its researchers and for providing a clear plan of action for future developments. The Committee continues to revise its Action Plan in order to include key themes emerging from the 2012 LSE Staff Survey and CROS 2013 Survey. Qualitative comments In addition to the statistical results, CROS respondents provided specific comments, including: An LSE position certainly attracts many more networking opportunities than other institutions - the challenge is how to turn them in to funding and jobs! Career paths of researchers are not well defined. Promotions and salary grades are not according to 5