Research Staff Conference
27th January 2005
Discussion Paper
1.
Background
The first Cardiff University Career Development Conference for Research
Staff was held on 27th January 2005. The aims of the day were to:
 provide information on the support available for research staff and the
University’s obligations to them;
 give research staff the opportunity to feed into the post-merger policy
review process;
 provide research staff with the opportunity to meet, and discuss their
experiences with, other researchers from across the Institution;
 raise awareness of the importance of career planning for individual
researchers.
Delegates were asked to discuss, in groups, the key issues facing research
staff at Cardiff, at both School and University levels, and how these impact
(positively or negatively) on the career development of researchers. This brief
paper summarises the main issues raised by the groups. Each group’s
flipchart notes also inform this paper.
2.
Benefits
Participants identified several benefits of working as a researcher in higher
education. The most significant of these is that the work itself is generally
both interesting and intellectually stimulating. Many researchers also spoke
of enjoying the flexibility and variety afforded by their day-to-day work.
Having the opportunity to concentrate purely on research, without having
teaching commitments, was also positively regarded.
3.
Career Development
The main discussion was concerned with research career routes, and how
these were identified, sustained and supported.
3.1
Fixed-term contracts
Being employed on fixed-term contracts was identified as the most negative
aspect of working as a researcher at Cardiff University. The lack of security
associated with being on fixed-term contracts can lead to low morale and, in
some cases, high levels of stress and even depression. Researchers spoke of
the need to constantly scan the horizon for the next post, which, as well as
being disruptive and inconvenient in terms of an individual’s personal life, can
also have negative effects on individual research projects.
1
It was recognised that, in order to sustain a successful research career in
academia, researchers on fixed-term contracts need to concern themselves
with three main goals: publishing their work, securing funding for future
research, and securing their next contract of employment. Nevertheless,
within the tight timescale of an individual research project, time is often not
allocated for research staff to engage in these ‘extra-curricular’ activities, nor
to participate in training and other career development activities. Additionally,
applying for the next research post, or the funding to continue with the present
work, is not always recognised as legitimate activity for researchers to engage
with during ‘project time’.
Researchers spoke of how data is frequently left unanalysed and publications
unwritten at the end of research projects. Research staff frequently have to
leave projects in order to take up their next position during the crucial data
analysis/writing-up phase of the research. This was considered to be an
inefficient use of resources. It can also lead to researchers being unable to
capitalise on the outcomes of the project.
Delegates were keen to see the University tackle redeployment in more
imaginative ways: one group, for example, proposed the establishment of a
database of researchers, detailing their skills, attributes and research
interests, along with details regarding their current contracts. This database
would allow collaboration between researchers and potential Principal
Investigators elsewhere within the University and could be used to identify job
opportunities for researchers.
Delegates sought clarity on the University’s future policy with regard to the
use of fixed-term contracts for research staff. Although it was recognised that
the University’s research income streams are not fixed, researchers at the
conference felt that the institution should also shoulder some of the risk
associated with this.
Delegates recognised that the use of fixed-term contracts differs between
disciplines, with a group of researchers in the social sciences pointing out that
it was not unusual for researchers in these disciplines to be employed on a
series of very short term contracts. The very short-term nature of these
contracts served to exacerbate the problems outlined above, which led to a
discussion regarding the possibility of imposing a minimum duration onto
successive short-term contracts.
3.2
Rewarding selfishness?
Many researchers voiced their concern at having to act in what they
characterised as a ‘selfish’ way in order to succeed in academia,
concentrating on their own priorities and their own careers rather than the
priorities of the University, the School or even the research group.
There was call for a greater recognition of work which supports research but
is not in the form of written publications, such as running labs, training others,
and so on.
3.3
Career routes
Three main issues were raised with regard to career routes:
2
3.3.1
Traditional routes into academia
The first concerned career routes into permanent academic posts. The
scarcity of permanent academic posts, particularly in relation to the number of
fixed-term researchers, was acknowledged. One group questioned whether
there were still clear routes into academia and expressed concern regarding a
perceived scarcity of lectureships.
3.3.2
Alternative career routes
It was acknowledged that there are alternative career trajectories to the
traditional PhD  postdoctoral research  lectureship route, and that not all
researchers wish to pursue an academic career. Many delegates, however,
expressed uncertainty regarding the alternative careers that were available for
research staff.
3.3.3
Career researchers?
Delegates recognised that an individual researcher would generally need to
secure a lectureship in order to attain the intellectual freedom to pursue their
own research interests. Several groups, however, were keen to stress that
many of those engaged in higher education research did not wish to pursue a
traditional academic career and wished to note the apparent irony that, in
order to sustain a research career, an individual would need to engage more
with teaching and less with research. One group asked the panel whether it
could be feasible to sustain a purely research-based career.
3.4
Applying for research funding
Researchers expressed a lack of certainty as to whether they would be
supported by the institution should they wish to apply for their own grants, or
indeed, whether research sponsors would consider applications from fixedterm workers. Many researchers were keen to apply for their own funding to
combat the lack of intellectual control over the research project which was
recognised as a problem in their current roles.
3.5
Reward
Concerns were raised regarding the way in which being employed on a series
of fixed-term contracts can have negative consequences for an individual’s
salary progression. Researchers expressed concerns that as they gained
more experience they would become too expensive, and that Principal
Investigators would generally prefer to employ less experienced staff as they
are cheaper. This leads to more experienced research staff being priced out
of the market or forced to take a pay cut to secure their next contract.
4.
Wider Structural Issues
4.1
The University and the School
A great deal of the discussion concerned researchers not feeling valued by
the Institution, and that their contribution towards its successes, particularly in
terms of the Research Assessment Exercise, can sometimes go
unrecognised. At a more practical level, many researchers at the conference
were uncertain as to the position of researchers within the broader University
structure: they stated that they had little knowledge of the University, its
3
workings and the relevance of this to researchers, and also of the relationship
between the central University and individual Schools. This frequently leads
to researchers feeling disconnected from the systems that have been put in
place to support them within the University.
Some groups expressed frustration at the distance they felt from the decisionmaking processes both within the wider University and within Schools.
Communication between decision-makers and researchers was described as
haphazard and ad hoc. Some researchers also spoke of feeling isolated
within their Schools.
Although researchers shared a certain commonality of experience, particularly
in relation to being employed on fixed-term contracts, it became apparent
from the discussion that there was also huge variety in terms of the lived
experience of being a member of research staff at Cardiff. In fact there was
even a degree of variability on the fixed-term employment issue with
differences across the University in terms of how these were managed by
supervisors and even Schools, and even the length of contracts available, as
outlined above. A further discrepancy across the University stems from a lack
of consistency in nomenclature – with terms such as ‘research associate’,
‘research fellow’, ‘postdoc’, and so on, being used interchangeably.
Researchers expressed uncertainty as to the levels of support they were
entitled to, not only from Principal Investigators on their individual research
projects, but also at School and University levels. It was felt that there were
no rules outlining how individual Schools should manage their research staff.
Many researchers felt that the University should issue contracts to formalise
the opportunities available to researchers to engage in career development
activities, including conference attendance, undertaking teaching and taking
on supervisory responsibilities. The University should also be more explicit
about its expectations of Principal Investigators.
4.2
The Researcher/Principal Investigator Relationship
It was acknowledged that the nature of the researcher/principal investigator
relationship plays a significant role in determining an individual’s experience
of working as a researcher within the University, and that it also has important
implications for an individual researcher’s own career development.
Several groups pointed to the tension that sometimes arises from the fact that
successful academics were not always adept at people management and that
it is possible to be in a position with HE where one has line-management
responsibility but no management experience or skills. It was felt that
Principal Investigators should be given training in the key skills that were
required for this role.
Delegates recognised that Principal Investigators were generally overworked
and subject to high levels of pressure in their own roles. This problem is
exacerbated by a lack of incentives for Principal Investigators to become good
managers.
4.3
Other Issues
4.3.1
Childcare Provision
4
Childcare presents a particular problem for some, particularly as researchers
typically work outside normal office hours whereas crèches do not.
4.3.2
Illness
A further concern was raised regarding illness. Although researchers at
Cardiff are entitled to sick pay from the beginning of their employment, it is not
always possible to extend the research contract. This can lead to work being
left incomplete which has important implications for an individual as they try to
secure future research contracts.
Dr Sara Williams, Training and Development Manager
Human Resources
April 2005
5