Example of paper format (Example content shown in italics). The paper should be one side
of A4 where possible.
Paper for consideration by:
Title of paper:
Prepared by:
Presented by :
Date of meeting:
Purpose of
paper and
actions
required:
SMG
Presentation of WMS research
Professor Neil Johnson; Professor Jane Barlow; Elizabeth Cromwell;
John Burden; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Naila Rabbani
Professor Jane Barlow
15th May 2013
To request approval to develop an Early Career Researchers (ECR)
strategy
ISSUE:
Although individual researchers are responsible for pro-actively engaging with their own personal and
career development, WMS recognises the importance of personal and career development for ECRs,
and is committed to providing opportunities for this. Further support for ECR career development is
needed not only to retain new academic talent within WMS but is also important in terms of the
supply of researchers to academic careers beyond WMS. As part of this, WMS recognises that some
groups of staff (most typically women) are at greater risk of failing to progress in their careers despite
strong performance; this policy is designed to address this. It should be noted that the principles
underpinning this policy, and a majority of the practical steps, apply equally to ‘early career teachers’
as well as ECRs.
AIM:
Aim – to offer non-compulsory career development support to ECRs with more specific actions aimed
at those seeking to develop academic careers, with a particular focus on those groups of staff
recognised as being at greatest risk of failing to progress in their careers despite strong performance.
OBJECTIVES:
a. ECRs and line managers will identify development goals and specific development
activity as part of annual review. Progress will be reviewed quarterly and evidenced
by a portfolio that will document continuing professional development (detail in
Appendix 1);
b. Up to two weeks/year of ECR time will be protected for agreed research related
development activity;
c. WMS will facilitate regular training sessions for ECRs in widely applicable training
areas identified by the WMS ECR Network;
d. Mentoring skills will be introduced into the training for supervisors and linemanagers;
e. A pilot study of the use of mentoring and the PGA/Cert in Transferable Skills in
Science will be set up by Neil Johnson as detailed in appendix 2;
f. WMS will identify a training budget for ECRs ;
g. An extended peer review period of 4 months will be brought in for fellowship
applications to ensure that high levels of support can be given to these applications.
This will begin with the Jan 2014 NIHR fellowships round (Appendix 3);
2.
Metrics – to assess the effectiveness of this support we will:
a. Monitor the career tracks of WMS ECRs at the end of each contract
b. Use‘exit’ interviews to collect qualitative information about the experience of ECRs at
WMS and examine whether ECR specific data can be extracted from the annual
PULSE survey;
c. Monitor success rates in fellowship applications by number and gender;
d. The effectiveness, uptake and success of the programme will be reviewed annually by
the WMS Welfare and communications group who will report back to RSG.
Implementation- actions required
1.
Liaison with HR over inclusion in annual review, exit interviews, possible collection of
data via PULSE survey and training of line managers and supervisors in mentoring;
2.
Lead for mentoring pilot to be identified and mentoring pilot to be initiated;
3.
Communication with ECRS via ECR Network and WMS ECR website;
4.
Briefing of line-mangers by Heads of Division;
5.
Target for full implementation by September 2013.
RECOMMENDATION:
SMG to approve the above strategy.
Appendix 1.
Process
The process of ECR development will be administered via the annual review process (or at induction
for new starters). The review should include a discussion of the career aims of the postdoctoral
researcher and identify what development activities are required to progress towards that goal. The
outcome should be an agreed programme of development activity for the next year.
New starters should undergo an equivalent process as part of their induction. This will be used to
both set development goals and make sure that staff who are new to WMS are fully aware of the
development opportunities available at Warwick, and the commitment of WMS to ensuring that ECRs
fully engage with, and take responsibility for, their career development.
Progress measured via portfolio of evidence
Progress towards completion of this agreed programme will be reviewed quarterly by the line
manager and evidenced via a portfolio outlining what activities have been undertaken and what skills
this has developed. This portfolio will comprise of a series of short reports, detailing what
development need was identified, what activity has been undertaken and which skills this has
enhanced or developed including evidence on what is now being done differently.
The portfolio will not be a significant document, with perhaps a small amount of development activity
undertaken each month, but it will build into a significant record of continuing professional
development over the course of an ECR career.
The portfolio will be based around recognising and taking the opportunities to develop and improve
skills that are essential within the ECRs existing role and for progression.
Core competencies & Individual skills development
The portfolio will provide evidence that the ECR has developed a set of core research and other
transferable skills during their time at WMS and will identify a set of core competencies that will be of
benefit not only in ECRs their current role but will also develop the skills necessary for career
progression either in academia or other environments.
These core competencies will be specific to an individual but are likely to include areas such as:

Communication Skills (covering both oral and written communication to a variety of
audiences)

Research skills (including technical skills and other research related skills such as project
management and grant writing)

Self-management skills such as time management, supervision, basic budget skills,
collaboration skills, negotiation, equality and diversity, health and safety, career planning

Other generic transferable skills (e.g. CVs, writing job applications, supervising students,
running meetings)
Outside these core competencies ECRs will be able to identify and request development
opportunities that relate specifically to their role and career aims. This can include a whole spectrum
of activity from formal courses to job shadowing as a means of gaining new skills.
Protected time for development activity
Most of the funding bodies recommend that all researchers should undertake appropriate training,
for example in research design, regulatory and ethics approvals and consents, equipment use,
confidentiality, data management, record keeping and data protection (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Policy-and-position-statements/WTD002753.htm)
Up to two weeks/year of ECR time is ring-fenced for such research related career development
activities that benefit both the individual and the school. These two weeks/year would be allocated
for activities such as self-management skills- time management, writing papers and funding
applications or other activities which are related to research, enhance the development and
employability of the ECR and bring a benefit to the School or Division.
It should be emphasised to both line managers and ECRs that, the ring-fenced time may increase
depending on the need of individual ECR with the agreement of the line mangers. Whilst it is
expected that this time is made available to ECRs, there needs to be an agreed plan of work for the
ECR to undertake during this time.
In addition to this type of development activity, ECRs will also be able to identify and access formal
training activities which require the ECR to take time away research work to undertake the training
activity. Such activity can include job shadowing, in-house and external training courses. This type of
activity should also be identified and agreed between line manager and ECR as part of the on-going
annual review of training needs and would not be expected to exceed more than a few days each
year.
Appendix 2
Mentoring Pilot Study – Neil Johnson
Proposal
1. Aim – to offer career development support with a particular focus on those groups of staff
recognised as being at greatest risk of failing to progress in their careers despite strong
performance.
2. Method –
a. We set up a pilot scheme designed to promote mentoring
b. We do this through the PGA/Cert in Transferable Skills in Science. A key part of this
course is designed to encourage and enable researchers to seek out appropriate
mentoring.
c. We target this at Post-Doctoral Researchers with particular encouragement for
women to be involved
d. Participation would be voluntary (recognising that compulsory participation is likely
to be problematic)
e. To facilitate this we request PIs to allow those involved some limited time out of their
working week to undertake the Award/Cert, on the understanding that the
Researcher will match this from their own time. The PG Cert is 600hrs, or 200hrs pa
over the typical three-year term of a project; 50% would require approximately 2hrs
from each working week. The PG Award requires half this commitment. This is
entirely consistent with the time proposed in the programme supported by SMG last
year (half a day per week to be made available for career development activities that
benefit both the individual and the school plus 4-6 days per year for formal training).
f. We introduce ‘mentoring’ skills into our supervisor training as a means of raising the
general level of mentoring skills amongst PIs and supervisors.
g. We set up and train a small panel of mentors willing to offer mentorship to this group
given that involvement in the PGA/Cert is likely to stimulate demand for mentorship
from someone other than the line manger (the PI).
h. We appoint someone as ‘lead’ to support and coordinate the pilot.
3. Metrics – to assess whether or not the pilot is working we propose that:
a. We review the lessons learnt from this pilot over the next two years and consider
whether it would be appropriate to broaden the scheme.
b. To do this we use a combination of:
i. Monitoring the career tracks of our ECRs, looking in particular at
1. Changes in career tracks occurring over time
2. Differences between those undertaking the additional mentoring
programme when compared with those who do not
ii. Using our ‘exit’ interviews to collect qualitative information on the
experience of ECRs at WMS.
4. Future – in the future we may wish to:
a. Consider whether there are any other groups we particularly wish to include in such a
pilot - for example those in the early phases of the Integrated Clinical Academic
Training pathway – and whether they are best served by the above approach or some
alternative (for example ‘cascade mentoring’ in which mentoring is provided for
more senior trainees who in turn provide mentoring to more junior trainees).
b. Consider the option of inviting alumni to act as mentors.
Appendix 3
Increased peer review for fellowship applications
The internal peer process will be changed for fellowships and the review period for increased to 4
months before the deadline. The reasons for this are;
1. To make sure fellowship applications are given the high level of support that has resulted in
recent increased success in WMS fellowship applications
2. To ensure that those applications submitted have a reasonable chance of success and
resources and effort are not directed to those applicants who are not yet in a position where
fellowship success is likely.
The new fellowships process will be;
4 months before deadline
3 months before deadline
1 month before deadline
1 week before deadline
Submission of a first draft of the application
Internal peer review and decision on
whether application is to proceed
Work with academic mentors and RSS to
develop proposal
Resubmission to internal peer review for
final approval to submit
FP14 sign off
Internal peer review will seek to make use of academics with specific experience of fellowship review
panels alongside those with expertise in the subject area.
The process will be flexible to allow for external applicants not aware of WMS processes, but it is
expected the majority of applications will follow this process
Those whose applications are not allowed to proceed to submission will be provided with detailed
information into what was felt to be weakening their application and supported to improve these
areas for future submissions.
1.