UKRI have recently published reviewer responses to a review of the 2008 Concordat framework to support the career development of academic researchers in the UK. The report outlines 15 recommendations for the framework which are anticipated to form part of the revised Concordat in 2019.
The Concordat Implementation Group (CIG) and the RSA are committed to reviewing these recommendations in anticipation of the spring 2019 review and incorporating them into Lancaster University’s on-going commitments to Research Staff and the HR Excellence Award.
Unsure what all of this really means? Don’t worry, a post detailing what this all means will be coming soon!
Recommendation Summary (source)
Recommendation 1: The Concordat should continue to be used in order to maintain the UK’s standing as a world leader in its support for researchers, and to continue to improve the culture of researcher support. However, some revisions are required to ensure it is effective in driving culture change.
Recommendation 2: The focus and primary aim of the Concordat is for the support of research staff. The definition of ‘researchers’ used in the Concordat should be explicitly broadened to include staff not primarily hired as researchers, but who are research active. Any reporting relating to the implementation of the Concordat should be clear about the groups of researchers to which it refers.
Recommendation 3: A revised Concordat should focus on researchers in academia but with recognition that the issues in industry and other sectors are similar, although the challenges may be different. It must also emphasise that the principles and obligations apply equally to all research staff, regardless of contract type.
Recommendation 4: There should be increased support for researcher independence, including autonomy in their own career development, and the freedom to innovate.
- A revised Concordat should address the tension between PIs and postdoctoral independence, setting out clearly the obligations for both groups.
- There should be increased emphasis and support, by both funders and employers, for uptake of researchers’ 10 days training allowance.
- Development of researcher independence should be supported through allocated time within grants.
- 20% of a researcher’s time should be allowed for developing independent research and skills.
Recommendation 5: A revised Concordat should promote finding solutions to the problems of mobility, time-limited contracts and promotion that many researchers face.
Recommendation 6: The language, formatting and structure of the Concordat should be updated.
- Updated to reflect modern policies and practices. It is essential that the Concordat is informed by and linked to any relevant new or revised legislation or policy frameworks.
- More succinct but link to specific examples of good practice.
- Accessible to all stakeholder groups. Consideration should be made to the format of the Concordat to ensure it remains relevant and up to date. Different formats may be required for different stakeholder groups.
- Restructured to articulate the responsibility of different stakeholder groups, including research staff, PIs, employers and funders. A structure of principles and Obligations would clearly set out the responsibilities of the different groups in driving and implementing change.
Recommendation 7: Equality, diversity and inclusion should be integrated throughout a revised Concordat, outlining specific responsibilities of stakeholder groups in supporting this area. Whilst avoiding repetition, the retention of an updated principle is also required so that it remains a priority.
Recommendation 8: A communications plan should be developed which ensures that the Concordat remains relevant to new and updated legislation / policy, and which ensures that all relevant stakeholder groups have appropriate access to the Concordat.
- The list of signatories should be reviewed and, if required, updated.
- Funders should require all PIs to be aware of the Concordat and ask them to communicate it to their research staff.
- Employers should ensure that the communications plan is implemented throughout their organisation, and should monitor researcher engagement with the Concordat, for example through participation in annual surveys.
Recommendation 9: Concordat signatories should prioritise a more comprehensive collection of researcher and research careers information, and the Concordat Strategy Group should investigate options to achieve this.
- The UK should aspire to support data collection exercises that are comparable with international models.
- Funders should support research into the most appropriate methods required to obtain such data.
- Existing surveys, including CROS and PIRLS, should be updated to ensure that broad comparability can be made about researcher aspirations and career paths across the sector. Such surveys should aspire to be as representative of the sector as possible.
- Best practice should be shared on ways to engage with researcher alumni communities.
- The Higher Education Statistics Agency should be invited to join the Concordat Strategy Group as a delivery partner.
Recommendation 10: The Concordat must continue to be owned by the sector, with implementation overseen by a representative steering group.
- The Terms of Reference of the Concordat Strategy Group should be reviewed.
- The membership of the Concordat Strategy Group should be reviewed, ensuring that all relevant stakeholder groups (including researchers, PIs, employers and funders) are represented, and/or in working groups which report to the CSG. To represent employers of researchers beyond academia, the involvement of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) is welcomed.
Recommendation 11: The sector should take a strategic approach in considering the skills needs of the UK through commitment to activities which develop the skills of research staff regardless of contract length and in preparation for diverse career paths.
Recommendation 12: There should be a coordinated approach between the development of UK Research and Innovation and the Concordat going forward. UKRI should use its sectoral influence to ensure appropriate consistency across different research domains.
Recommendation 13: A revised Concordat should include a new principle for funders. Funders should ensure that the principles of the Concordat are adopted through changes to funding processes.
Recommendation 14: The UK operation of the HR Excellence in Research Award, or any other relevant awards, should be reviewed to ensure it remains relevant as a driver for change.
- A meta-analysis of data for best practice (from published action plans) would give a composite picture of the ‘ideal’, along with case studies for implementation.
- Evaluation of applications for the award must be evidence-based and institutions may require more guidance on requirements.
- Strong consideration should be given to the use of a graded assessment (e.g. bronze / silver / gold).
- There must be a quality assurance of reviewers and of the reviewing process, to ensure that assessment panels are representative of the sector.
- Views should be sought from organisations outside academia (such as businesses, charities and others) in order to produce guidance for HEIs on the requirements of the award
Recommendation 15: The UK operation of the HR Excellence in Research Award should be reviewed to ensure that all UK HEIs have access to the UK application process and are not constrained in applying for any associated EU funding beyond Brexit.
- A revised membership model for Vitae should be considered, which separates services associated with the HR Excellence Award and other Vitae activities, and which operates in an open and transparent way.
- The Concordat Strategy Group must ensure that processes are in place to maintain UK standards for researcher development which are at least comparable to those set by the EU.
- Guidelines should be developed to outline any funding implications for UK HEIs who are not in receipt of an HR Excellence Award.