In 2020 Vitae and UKRSA ran a number of different Wellcome Culture Cafe across the country and at the 2020 Vitae conference. Four main challenges were identified by the participants, together with ideas to address these, as detailed below;

​

Challenge 1: Heavy workload and lack of recognition of ‘hidden work’

​

Postdocs do many tasks in addition to research for which they are not recognised, such as administration and supervision of students. Since they are often expected to complete these tasks on top of full-time research, their workload can be as great as that of academic staff. It is difficult for postdocs to make time for professional development or to work towards an independent research career. It is expected that students will be remunerated for any additional work in universities, but this is rarely the case for research staff.

​

Ideas for change

• Put in place recognition schemes – such as recognising postdocs as co-supervisors of PhD students, irrespective of how long is left on their contract.

 

• Universities/departments should monitor the workload of research staff to reveal the amount of additional work postdocs are doing.

 

• Introduce fellowships that include a set amount of time for professional development.

 

• Make available small grants that postdocs can apply for, to help demonstrate independence and gain preliminary results for fellowship applications. 

 

• Hidden work should be recognised in appraisals. It would be beneficial to work with HR departments (who manage appraisals) to help them understand the requirements and specific challenges of researcher workloads.

 

Challenge 2: Narrow criteria for promotion and progression and unclear process

Measures of success and excellence are focused on tangible outputs, such as publications. Academics and researchers need to be encouraged to value other activities, including wider citizenship within an institution. Researchers also report that the promotions process is not transparent. In many institutions, promotion of postdocs only happens if there are sufficient funds within the research grant and if the PI puts a researcher forward. Promotion often does not include input from the postdoc themselves, so the procedure and criteria for promotion are not always well known within the postdoc community.

​

Ideas for change

• Record additional activities undertaken by research staff, such as conference attendance, giving talks, committee membership and meeting attendance. In one institution there is an internal system for this, which is open for others to search and is sent to heads of department, which helps to raise people’s profile. It can also be used as a record for appraisals and discussions with managers and to establish the impact that initiatives are having.

 

• Provide opportunities for more junior and/or non-academic staff to chair committees. This would lighten the workload of senior academics and provide development opportunities for other staff, as well as giving them a voice on committees. 

 

• Encourage ECRs to put themselves forward for committees. Some examples of good practice were shared: The HR Excellence in Research Award action plan included ECR representation on all committees; bringing in their perspectives was very valuable. A business continuity group established during the Covid pandemic included a whole range of staff and generated great ideas and innovation. This structure will be used again in future to incorporate perspectives from across the University.

 

• Introduce a separate promotion track for researchers that is independent of research grant funding.

 

• Overhaul the promotions procedure, making it a clear, fair and transparent system.

 

• Recruitment criteria should consider an individual’s contribution to the institution, not just their publications. Consider asking for an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion statement from applicants (as UKRI does for its Future Leaders Fellowships) outlining their commitment to EDI and the actions they wish to take to improve research culture in the institution.

 

Challenge 3: Need for stronger leadership and support from PIs

Research managers and leaders often seem reluctant to change the status quo and current structure of the research system. Workplace culture seems more dynamic in the private sector. 

​

Ideas for change

• Learn lessons from the private sector in how to train leaders and managers and how they approach their roles.

 

• Gain high-level engagement for changes to research culture – for example, create senior positions focused on this, such as ‘Dean of Research Culture’.

 

Challenge 4: Promoting a healthy work-life balance

Workplace stress and a long-hours culture are driving many talented researchers out of academia. Often they have to fit research into the evenings and weekends as they have other commitments during the week, such as teaching.

​

Ideas for change

• Clearer communication that researchers do not have to work long hours, 7 days a week to ‘make it’ as a PI.

​

• Ensure that researchers have sufficient time allocated for research within their contracted hours.

​

• Research managers should role model a healthy work-life balance, by only working within set hours, taking annual leave, taking breaks when needed and being open about wellbeing and mental health.