Careers  in  Research  Online  Survey    (CROS)  2013      

   University  of  Portsmouth  Results  and  Analysis      

                     

 Report  prepared  February  2014    

   

 

 

 

 

  2  

 

 

 Research  staff  from  68  UK  institutions  were  asked  for  their  views  on  working  conditions,  career  aspirations  and  career  development  opportunities  as  part  of  the  Careers  in  Research  Online  Survey  (CROS)  conducted  between  March  and  May  2013.  For  the  purpose  of  CROS,  research  staff  are  broadly  defined  as  individuals  whose  primary  responsibility  is  to  conduct  research  and  are  employed  for  that  purpose.  At  the  University  of  Portsmouth  (UoP)  71  researchers  from  across  all  five  faculties  filled  out  CROS.  This  report  presents  the  results  from  UoP  CROS  2013  and  compares  these  to  the  UoP  CROS  2011  results,  and  to  the  UK  2013  aggregate.      Overall,  UoP  results  were  in  line  with  the  UK  aggregate.  In  some  areas,  UoP  scored  better  than  the  UK  average,  for  example  in  understanding  of  the  Athena  Swan  Charter  for  Women  in  Science  and  in  feeling  valued  for  contributions  to  publications  and  public  engagement.  An  area  of  weakness  at  UoP  was  the  perceived  usefulness  of  the  Professional  Development  Review  (PDR),  which  was  rated  as  less  useful  in  each  of  the  areas  surveyed  when  compared  to  the  UK  aggregate.  Further,  only  51.6%  of  research  staff  reported  having  participated  in  an  appraisal  in  the  last  two  years,  with  over  30%  of  those  who  had  not  participated  indicating  this  was  because  they  had  not  been  invited  to  do  so.  At  UoP  and  across  the  UK  the  CROS  survey  revealed  a  lack  of  familiarity  with  initiatives  relevant  to  research  staff,  including  Vitae  and  the  Researcher  Development  Framework.      Key  recommendations    • The  University  needs  to  improve  uptake  and  access  to  the  PDR  process  for  research  staff.  This  may  

include  supporting  supervisors  to  ensure  research  staff  are  invited  to  take  part  in  the  PDR  process.  Mechanisms  to  improve  the  usefulness  of  the  PDR  process  for  research  staff  also  need  to  be  reviewed  and  improved.    

 • More  research  staff  at  UoP  compared  to  other  institutions  reported  having  spent  no  time  on  training  

and  development  activities.  Alongside  this  finding,  50%  of  UoP  research  staff  were  interested  in  undertaking  training  or  development  in  career  management,  knowledge  exchange,  leadership  and  management,  personal  effectiveness,  research  impact  and  supervision  of  doctoral/masters  students.  Efforts  to  provide  and  promote  training  and  development  activities  to  research  staff  in  these  areas  should  be  progressed.    

 • Research  staff  generally  reported  satisfaction  with  their  work-­‐life  balance,  however,  questions  included  

in  the  UoP  survey  that  asked  specifically  about  the  impact  of  the  time-­‐limited  contracts  revealed  that  over  75%  of  research  staff  feel  that  looking  for  new  contracts  impacts  on  their  career,  personal  well-­‐being  and  their  ability  to  achieve  research  goals.  Career  support  that  enables  research  staff  to  plan  their  careers  over  a  longer-­‐term  and  ensure  fair  access  to  promotion  and  opportunities  should  be  considered.    

 • Efforts  to  promote  and  increase  awareness  of  initiatives  and  their  relevance  to  research  staff  should  be  

undertaken.      

  3  

1.  Introduction    CROS  has  been  running  since  2002  and  gathers  anonymous  data  about  working  conditions,  career  aspirations  and  career  development  opportunities  from  research  staff  working  in  UK  higher  education  institutions.  Data  from  CROS  is  intended  to  inform  the  implementation  of  the  Concordat  to  Support  the  Career  Development  of  Researchers  and  improve  our  understanding  of  the  needs  and  views  of  research  staff.  Vitae  have  published  a  report  detailing  the  UK  aggregate  results  of  CROS  20131  and  it  is  anticipated  that  CROS  will  be  conducted  biennially.  At  UoP,  CROS  was  first  carried  out  in  2011.  Where  possible  data  from  CROS  2011  has  been  compared  to  the  CROS  2013  data  and  the  comparison  is  presented  in  this  report.  Differences  in  the  questions  asked  and  format  of  the  answers  between  the  two  surveys  precludes  direct  comparisons  for  many  sections  of  the  surveys.  Questions  specific  for  UoP  were  included  in  the  version  of  the  CROS  2013  survey  completed  by  UoP  research  staff  (section  9).      2. Who  responded?  

Approximately  200  UoP  research  staff  were  asked  to  complete  CROS  2013.  71  submitted  completed  surveys2,  and  16  began  but  then  abandoned  the  survey;  data  from  abandoned  surveys  was  not  included  in  the  reported  results.    The  overall  response  rate  at  UoP  was  therefore  35.5%.  This  is  an  improvement  over  the  30%  response  rate  at  UoP  for  CROS  2011  and  compares  favourably  with  the  UK-­‐wide  CROS  2013  response  rate  of  26%.      Background  attributes  of  the  UoP  CROS  cohort:    • 45.1%  were  females,  39.4%  were  male,  while  15.5%  preferred  not  to  indicate  their  gender  or  did  not  

answer  the  question.  • 49.3%  were  UK  British  Nationals,  33.8%  were  not  (of  these  66.7%  were  EU  nationals)  and  16.9%  

preferred  not  to  or  did  not  answer  the  question.  • 1.4%  considered  themselves  disabled,  84.5%  do  not  and  14.1%  preferred  not  to  or  did  not  provide  an  

answer.  • 79.1%  worked  full-­‐time  and  20.9%  work  part-­‐time.  • 87.7%  have  fixed  term  contracts  10.8%  have  open  ended  contracts,  1.5%  are  unsure.      Table  1:  Breakdown  of  UoP  CROS  cohort  by  faculty  

  CCI   HSS   PBS   Science   Tech   Did  not  indicate  faculty  

number  of  respondents  

5   4   6   30   16   10  

%  total  respondents  

7.0%   5.6%   8.6%   42.3%3   22.5%   14.1%  

   Table  2:  UoP  CROS  cohorts’  experience  as  a  researcher  

  <1  year     <4  years   <6  years   <11  years  Experience  as  a  researcher  

17.4%   47.8%   71.0%   88.5%  

Experience  as  a  researcher  at  UoP  

26.1%   65.2%   84.1%   94.2%  

 

                                                                                                                         1  Careers  in  Research  Online  Survey  (CROS)  2013  UK  aggregate  results  2  Completed  surveys  include  those  where  an  occasional  question  was  missed.  To  account  for  missed  questions  %  were  calculated  using  the  number  of  responses  to  each  question.  3    Respondents  from  the  Schools  of  Biological  Sciences  (15.4%)  and  Pharmacy  and  Biomedical  Sciences  (8.7%)  form  a  significant  proportion  (24.1%)  of  the  total  CROS  cohort.        

  4  

   Figure  1:  Age  profile  of  UoP  CROS  cohort  

     

            Figure  2:  Main  source  of  funding  for  current  position

         Table  3:  Number  of  individual  employment  contracts  at  UoP    

1   2   3   4   ≥5  44.8%   22.4%   9.0%   9.0%   14.9%  

 

Table  4:  Total  length  of  current  contract  

6  months  or  less   7-­‐12  months   13-­‐24   25-­‐36   ≥37  months  17.0%   17.0%   42.6%   21.3%   2.1%  

     

6%  

27%  

29%  

16%  

7%  

7%  5%   3%  

25  and  under  

26  -­‐  30  

31  -­‐  35  

36  -­‐  40  

41  -­‐  45  

46  -­‐  50  

51  -­‐  55  

56  or  older  

7%  9%  

32%  

16%  

5%  

5%  

8%  

18%  Charity  funded  

EU/EC  funded  

Ins`tu`on  funded  

Research  Council  

UK  industry  

UK  government  

Other  

No  answer  

  5  

3.  Perceptions  of  value,  recognition  and  integration    Research  staff  were  asked  whether  they  felt  valued  and  recognised  for  their  contributions  to  nine  research  related  areas  (Fig.  3),  whether  they  felt  that  they  were  treated  comparably  to  other  staff  (Fig.  4)  and  how  well  integrated  into  the  research  community  they  felt  (Fig.  5).  In  each  of  these  areas,  UoP  researchers’  responses  were  in  line  with  or  exceeded  the  UK  aggregate.  Research  staff  were  also  asked  if  they  were  satisfied  with  their  work-­‐life  balance  (Table  5).  UoP  responses  were  in  line  with  the  UK  aggregate,  with  the  majority  of  respondents  agreeing  to  being  satisfied  or  very  satisfied  with  their  work-­‐life  balance.  

 

Figure  3:  Strongly  agree/agree  that  my  contribution  is  valued  and  recognised  

 

 

Figure  4:  Strongly  agree/agree  that  you  are  treated  the  same  as  other  staff  

 

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

Grant/funding  applica`ons  

Knowledge  transfer  and  commercialisa`on  ac`vi`es  

Managing  budgets/resources  

Peer  reviewing  

Publica`ons  

Public  engagement  with  research  

Supervising/managing  staff  

Supervising  research  students  

Teaching  and  lecturing  

UoP   All  UK  

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

Access  to  training  and  development  opportuni`es  

Opportuni`es  to  aeend  conferences  and  external  mee`ngs  

Opportuni`es  to  par`cipate  in  decision-­‐making  processes  (e.g.  commieees)  

Opportuni`es  for  promo`on  and  progression  

Requests  for  flexible  working  

Terms  and  condi`ons  of  employment  (excluding  any  fixed-­‐term  nature  of  contract)  

Visibility  on  websites  and  staff  directories  

UoP   All  UK  

  6  

Figure  5:  Strongly  agree/agree  that  you  feel  integrated  into  the  research  community  

 

   Table  5:  Satisfaction  with  work-­‐life  balance    

  UoP  2011   UoP   All  UK  2013  Strongly  agree/agree  that  I  am  

satisfied  with  my  work-­‐life  balance  71.1%   68.1%   69.8%  

 

 

4.  Usefulness  of  the  PDR  process,  development  and  career  support  

At  UoP,  51.6%  of  contract  research  staff  reported  that  they  had  participated  in  an  appraisal  in  the  last  two  years,  or  since  starting  their  current  position,  compared  to  the  all  UK  figure  of  59.5%  (Table  6).  In  CROS  2011,  56.8%  of  UoP  research  staff  reported  that  they  had  participated  in  an  appraisal  in  the  last  two  years  (Table  6).  Reasons  for  not  participating  in  an  appraisal  are  shown  below  in  table  7.  Research  staff  that  had  been  appraised  in  the  last  2  years  were  asked  to  rate  the  usefulness  of  the  process.  At  UoP,  usefulness  scores  were  lower  in  each  category  than  the  UK  aggregate  (Fig.  6).  In  most  areas  usefulness  scores  were  also  lower  then  the  2011  UoP  CROS  scores  (Fig.  6).        Table  6:  Staff  reporting  that  they  had  been  appraised  in  the  last  two  years    

UoP  2011   UoP  2013   All  UK  2013  56.8%   51.6%   59.5%  

   Table  7:  Reasons  for  not  participating  in  an  appraisal    

  UoP  2011   UoP  2013   All  UK  2013  You  are  on  probation   10.5%   9.4%   10.9%  

You’ve  only  recently  been  appointed   26.3%   25.0%   29.7%  Haven’t  been  invited  to  do  so   57.9%   31.2%   37.8%  

Haven’t  arranged  this   5.3%   6.2%   6.0%  Not  eligible   0.0%   9.4%   5.2%  

Other  (*not  an  option  in  2011)   *   18.8%   10.4%      

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

You  are  integrated  into  your  department's  research  community  

You  are  integrated  into  your  ins`tu`on's  research  community  

You  are  integrated  into  your  wider  disciplinary  community  

UoP  2011   UoP  2013   All  UK  2013  

  7  

 Figure  6:  Usefulness  of  the  PDR  process  (excludes  n/a  responses)  

           5. Development  and  training  Research  staff  were  asked  how  many  days  they  had  spent  on  training  and  development  in  the  last  year  (Fig.  7).      29.7%  of  UoP  research  staff  reported  having  spent  no  time  on  training,  this  is  higher  than  in  2011,  when,  at  UoP,  the  figure  was  24.4%.  Overall,  in  the  2013  UK  CROS  aggregate  20.6%  of  research  staff  had  spent  no  time  on  training  or  development  activities  in  the  last  year  (Fig.  7).  More  than  50%  of  UoP  researchers  were  interested  in  undertaking  training  or  development  in  career  management,  knowledge  exchange,  leadership  and  management,  personal  effectiveness,  research  impact  and  supervision  of  doctoral/masters  students  (Table  8).  At  UoP,  research  staff  felt  that  they  took  part  in  professional/career  development  planning  in  line  with  the  UK  aggregate  (Fig.  8).        Figure  7:  Time  spent  on  training  and  development  in  the  last  year  

 

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

Overall  

For  you  to  highlight  issues  

Helping  you  focus  on  your  career  aspira`ons  and  how  these  are  met  by  your  current  role  

Iden`fying  your  strengths  and  achievements  

Leading  to  training  or  other  con`nuing  professional  development  opportuni`es  

Leading  to  changes  in  work  prac`ces  

Reviewing  your  personal  progress  

UoP  2011   UoP  2013   All  UK  2013  

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

0  

>0-­‐3  days  

4  -­‐  6  days  

7  or  more  days  

UoP   All  UK  

  8  

     Table  8:  In  which  area  have  you  undertaken  or  would  like  to  undertake  further  training  or  development?    

  Have  undertaken  activity   Have  not  undertaken  activity  but  would  like  to  

  UoP   All  UK   UoP   All  UK  Career  management   11.4%   19.9%   58.6%   54.0%  

Collaboration  and  team  working   20.3%   24.6%   43.5%   41.2%  Communication  and  dissemination   36.2%   31.9%   37.7%   41.3%  

Equality  and  diversity   29.0%   26.6%   24.6%   21.2%  Ethical  research  conduct   29.4%   24.8%   33.8%   29.9%  Knowledge  exchange   22.4%   14.3%   50.7%   51.3%  

Leadership  and  management   14.7%   19.3%   55.9%   53.2%  Personal  effectiveness   15.9%   21.0%   55.1%   47.6%  Public  engagement   18.8%   18.6%   46.4%   51.1%  Research  impact   17.4%   17.5%   71.0%   62.9%  

Research  skills  and  techniques   43.5%   41.5%   40.6%   39.2%  Supervision  of  doctoral/masters  students   30.0%   28.8%   51.4%   48.8%  

Teaching  and  lecturing   32.9%   31.9%   45.7%   45.3%            Figure  8:  Strongly  agree/agree  that  you  take  part  in  career  development  planning    

                   

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

You  are  encouraged  to  engage  in  personal  and  career  development  

You  take  ownership  of  your  career  development  

You  have  a  clear  career  development  plan  

You  maintain  a  formal  record  of  your  con`nuing  professional  development  ac`vi`es  

You  use  the  Vitae  Researcher  Development  Framework  to  support  your  con`nuing  professional  development  

ac`vity  

UoP   All  UK  

  9  

 6. Knowledge  and  understanding  of  relevant  initiatives  Research  staff  were  asked  about  their  knowledge  and  understanding  of  various  relevant  initiatives  (Fig.  9-­‐17).  Research  staff  at  UoP  reported  being  generally  more  knowledgeable  of  Athena  Swan  Charter  than  research  staff  at  other  institutions  (Fig.  9).  With  the  exception  of  the  research  excellence  framework  (Fig.  15),  research  staff  at  UoP  and  across  the  UK  had  little  awareness  of  national  initiatives  including,  Vitae  and  the  Researcher  Development  Framework  (Fig.  16-­‐17).      

 

     

     

     

   

   

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  9:  Athena  Swan  Charter  for  Women  in  Science  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  10:  Concordat  for  Engaging  the  Public  with  Research  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  11:  Concordat  to  Support  the  Career  Development  of  Researchers  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

 Figure  12:  Concordat  to  Support  Research  Integrity  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

  10  

 

   

   

   

   

             

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figher  13:  European  'HR  Excellence  in  Research'  Award  recogni_on  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  14:  RCUK  'Pathways  to  Impact'  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  15:  Research  Excellence  Framework  (REF)  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  16:  Vitae  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

UoP  

All  UK  

Figure  17:  Vitae  Researcher  Development  Framework  (RDF)  

Some  understanding  

I  know  this  exists  

Never  heard  of  

  11  

7. Recruitment  and  selection  Research  staff  were  asked  about  the  process  surrounding  their  recruitment  into  their  current  role  (Tables  9,  10)  and  the  usefulness  of  the  induction  they  received  (Fig.  18).  In  line  with  the  UK  aggregate,  UoP  research  staff  found  the  local  induction  into  their  role  more  useful  than  either  the  institutional  or  departmental  induction  (Fig.  18).    

 

Table  9:  How  research  staff  found  out  about  their  current  post  

  UoP   All  UK  By  word  of  mouth   25.4%   24.1%  I  am  the  grant/fellowship  holder   7.9%   6.7%  I  saw  it  advertised/listed   31.7%   44.0%  I  was  named  on  the  grant   7.9%   7.7%  I  was  redeployed   0.0%   3.0%  I  don't  know/can't  remember   1.6%   0.6%  My  previous  contract  was  extended   19.0%   8.4%  Other   6.3%   5.5%    

Table  10:  What  research  staff  were  provided  with  during  the  application  process  

  UoP   All  UK     Yes   No   Don’t  

know  Yes   No   Don’t  

know  A  written  description  summary  of  what  the  job  entailed  

78.3%   8.3%   13.3%   86.0%   9.5%   4.5%  

Details  of  the  qualifications  required  of  the  post-­‐holder  

76.7%   11.7%   11.7%   87.3%   8.4%   4.4%  

Details  of  the  specialist  research  skills  required  of  the  post-­‐holder  

78.7%   9.8%   11.5%   83.2%   11.0%   5.7%  

Details  of  the  transferable/personal/  management  skills  required  of  the  post-­‐holder  

61.7%   16.7%   21.7%   67.3%   17.4%   15.3%  

 

 

Figure  18:  Usefulness  of  induction  process  

 

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

Ins`tu`onal  induc`on  -­‐  UoP  2011  

Ins`tu`onal  induc`on  -­‐  UoP  2013  

Ins`tu`onal  induc`on  -­‐  all  UK  2013  

Departmental  induc`on  -­‐  UoP  2011  

Departmental  induc`on  -­‐  UoP  2013  

Departmental  induc`on  -­‐  all  UK  2013  

Local  induc`on  -­‐  UoP  2011  

Local  induc`on  -­‐  UoP  2013  

Local  induc`on  -­‐  all  UK  2013  

very  useful/useful   not  very  useful/not  useful   not  offered   offered  but  not  taken  up  

  12  

8. Your  roles  and  long-­‐term  aspirations  Research  staff  were  asked  if  they  had  undertaken  a  variety  of  tasks  in  the  areas  of  working  with  others,  research  and  financial  management,  engagement/impact  and  communication  and  dissemination  (Tables  11-­‐14).  If  the  researcher  had  not  undertaken  work  in  the  specified  area,  they  were  asked  if  they  would  like  the  opportunity  to  do  so  (Tables  11-­‐14).  In  most  areas  responses  from  UoP  research  staff  were  in  line  with  the  UK  aggregate.  Tasks  undertaken  by  10%  fewer  UoP  staff  than  the  UK  aggregate  were  planning  and  managing  a  project  and  writing  a  grant/funding  proposal.    

Table  11:  Working  with  others       Have  done   Not  done  but  would  like  to  

do     UoP   All  UK   UoP   All  UK  

Collaborate  with  colleagues  outside  the  UK   58.6%   66.2%   37.1%   29.7%  Collaborate  in  research  with  external  

organisations  58.6%   65.3%   37.1%   29.8%  

Mentor  and  support  other  researchers   52.2%   46.7%   39.1%   40.1%  Supervise  undergraduate  or  postgraduate  

research  projects  52.9%   58.0%   38.2%   31.3%  

Undertake  an  internship/placement  outside  higher  education  research  

11.6%   9.2%   46.4%   42.4%  

Work  as  part  of  a  cross-­‐disciplinary  team   50.7%   59.3%   39.1%   33.8%        Table  12:  Research  and  financial  management       Have  done   Not  done  but  would  like  to  

do     UoP   All  UK   UoP   All  UK  

Manage  a  budget   30.4%   37.9%   50.7%   42.9%  Plan  and  manage  a  project   38.2%   51.3%   52.9%   41.5%  

Write  a  grant/funding  proposal   40.0%   54.4%   51.4%   38.1%      Table  13:  Engagement  and  impact    

  Have  done   Not  done  but  would  like  to  do  

  UoP   All  UK   UoP   All  UK  Engage  with  policymakers  and  end  users   25.0%   29.0%   41.2%   45.1%  

Knowledge  exchange   44.6%   32.2%   44.9%   50.5%  Participate  in  public  engagement  activities   38.2%   39.5%   45.6%   40.0%  

Teach  or  lecture   52.2%   51.5%   31.9%   31.2%      Table  14:  Communication  and  dissemination    

  Have  done   Not  done  but  would  like  to  do  

  UoP   All  UK   UoP   All  UK  Present  work  at  a  conference  orally   84.1%   80.6%   11.6%   15.7%  

Write  up  research  for  publication  as  first  author  

71.0%   78.7%   24.6%   19.1%  

 

  13  

 Research  staff  were  asked  about  their  long-­‐term  career  aspirations  and  expectations  (Table  15).  More  UoP  research  staff  aspired  to  work  long-­‐term  in  a  primarily  research  and  teaching  post  in  higher  education  than  the  UK  aggregate.      Table  15:  Long-­‐term  career  aspirations  and  expectations    

  Area  I  aspire  and  expect  to  work  in  the  long  term  

Area  I  expect  to  work  in  

  UoP   All  UK   UoP   All  UK  

Career  in  higher  education  -­‐  primarily  research  and  teaching  

54.3%   42.9%   43.5%   35.4%  

Career  in  higher  education  -­‐  primarily  research  

22.9%   33.5%   21.7%   25.2%  

Career  in  HE  -­‐  primarily  teaching   0.0%   1.3%   1.4%   1.7%  

Other  role  in  higher  education   0.0%   1.3%   0.0%   1.9%  

Research  career  outside  higher  education  

11.4%   8.5%   13.0%   10.1%  

Self-­‐employment/running  your  own  business  

2.9%   2.8%   2.9%   1.6%  

Teaching  career  outside  HE   1.4%   0.2%   1.4%   0.6%  

Other  occupations   2.9%   4.0%   0.0%   7.2%  

Don't  know   4.3%   5.4%   15.9%   16.3%  

   

   

  14  

 9.  UoP  questions  In  questions  added  to  the  UK  survey  UoP  research  staff  were  asked  about  their  involvement  in  the  Research  Staff  Forum  (Table  16)  and  their  career  outlook  (Tables  17,  18).    

 Table  16:  Involvement  in  the  Research  Staff  Forum    I  attend  Research  Staff  Forum  Meetings   47.8%  I  know  who  my  Research  Staff  Representative  is   65.2%  I  find  research  staff  events  helpful   49.3%      Table  17:  Future  career  outlook    The  short  term  nature  of  my  contract  impacts  on  my  personal  wellbeing  

77.9%  

Looking  for  new  contracts  impacts  on  me  achieving  my  research  goals  

78.8%  

Looking  for  new  contracts  impacts  on  my  career   84.8%  I  am  confident  that  I  will  obtain  future  employment  after  my  current  contract  ends  

58.8%  

   Table  18:  At  what  point  in  current  position  do  you  look  for  another  contract?    I  am  always  actively  looking   30.5%  Before  the  last  year  of  my  current  role   10.2%  In  the  last  year  of  my  current  role   32.2%  In  the  last  few  months  of  my  current  role   20.3%  After  my  contract  has  ended   6.8%                                      

  15  

10.  Equality  and  diversity  

Researchers  were  asked  if  they  believe  their  institution  is  committed  to  equality  and  diversity.  At  UoP,  89.9%  agreed  with  the  statement,  an  improvement  over  the  82.3%  that  agreed  with  the  statement  in  CROS  2011  at  UoP.  The  UK  2013  CROS  aggregate  figure  was  85.8%.  Researchers  were  asked  if  they  had  felt  discriminated  against  in  their  current  post.  At  UoP,  12.5%  felt  they  had  been  discriminated  against.  This  was  similar  to  the  UoP  2011  CROS  figure  of  12.8%.  Across  the  UK  aggregate,  9.7%  of  researchers  felt  they  had  been  discriminated  against  in  their  current  post.    Respondents  were  asked  if  they  believe  staff  at  their  institution  are  treated  fairly  regardless  of  ethnic  background,  gender,  religion  or  belief,  sexual  orientation,  disability  or  age  in  relation  to  five  areas  (Fig.  19).  Respondents  were  also  asked  to  indicate  their  agreement  that  staff  at  their  institution  were  treated  fairly  irrespective  of  nine  legally  protected  characteristics  (Table  19).    Overall,  UoP  was  in  line  with  or  above  the  UK  aggregate.      

 

Figure  19:  Strongly  agree/agree  there  is  fair  treament  

 

 

 

Table  19:  Strongly  agree/agree  there  is  fair  treatment  

  UoP   All  UK  Age   85.5%   79.7%  

Disability   83.8%   77.4%  Ethnicity   84.1%   82.6%  Gender   82.6%   76.8%  

Gender  identity   76.5%   70.7%  Nationality   84.1%   82.7%  

Pregnancy  and  maternity   76.5%   68.9%  Religion/belief   83.8%   79.5%  

Sexual  orientation   80.9%   75.6%    

 

0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%  

Access  to  training  and  development  

Career  progression  /  promo`on  

Day  to  day  treatment  at  work  

Par`cipa`on  in  decision  making  

Recruitment  and  selec`on  

Reward  

UoP   All  UK