institution application bronze and silver award · mark (gem) trial, with the school of law...

Institution Application Bronze and Silver Award

1

ATHENA SWAN BRONZE INSTITUTION AWARDS

Recognise a solid foundation for eliminating gender bias and developing an inclusive culture that values all

staff.

This includes:

an assessment of gender equality in the institution, including quantitative (staff data) and qualitative (policies,

practices, systems and arrangements) evidence and identifying both challenges and opportunities

a four-year plan that builds on this assessment, information on activities that are already in place and what has

been learned from these

the development of an organisational structure, including a self-assessment team, to carry proposed actions

forward

ATHENA SWAN SILVER INSTITUTION AWARDS

Recognise a significant record of activity and achievement by the institution in promoting gender equality

and in addressing challenges in different disciplines. Applications should focus on what has improved since

the Bronze institution award application, how the institution has built on the achievements of award-

winning departments, and what the institution is doing to help individual departments apply for Athena

SWAN awards.

COMPLETING THE FORM

DO NOT ATTEMPT TO COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION FORM WITHOUT READING THE ATHENA SWAN

AWARDS HANDBOOK.

This form should be used for applications for Bronze and Silver institution awards.

You should complete each section of the application applicable to the award level you are applying for.

Additional areas for Silver applications are highlighted throughout

the form: 5.2, 5.4, 5.5(iv)

If you need to insert a landscape page in your application, please copy and paste the template page at the

end of the document, as per the instructions on that page. Please do not insert any section breaks as to do

so will disrupt the page numbers.

2

WORD COUNT

The overall word limit for applications are shown in the following table.

There are no specific word limits for the individual sections, and you may distribute words over each of the

sections as appropriate. At the end of every section, please state how many words you have used in that

section.

We have provided the following recommended word counts as a guide.

Institution application Bronze Silver

Word limit 10,000 12,000

Recommended word count

1.Letter of endorsement 500 500

2.Description of the institution 500 500

3. Self-assessment process 1,000 1,000

4. Picture of the institution 2,000 3,000

5. Supporting and advancing women’s careers 5,000 6,000

6. Supporting trans people 500 500

7. Further information 500 500

3

Name of institution University of Glasgow

Date of application Friday 29 April 2016

Award Level Bronze

Date joined Athena SWAN August 2011

Current award (Pre-May

2015)

Date: April 2012 Level: Bronze

Contact for application Katie Farell

Email [email protected]

Telephone 0141 330 5730

4

1. LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT FROM THE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

Recommended word count: Bronze: 500 words | Silver: 500 words

An accompanying letter of endorsement from the vice-chancellor or principal should be included. If the vice-

chancellor is soon to be succeeded, or has recently taken up the post, applicants should include an

additional short statement from the incoming vice-chancellor.

Note: Please insert the endorsement letter immediately after this cover page.

Athena SWAN Manager Equality Challenge Unit 7th floor, Queens House 55/56 Lincoln's Inn Fields London WC2A 3LJ

25 April 2016

Dear Dr Gilligan

I have great pleasure in enclosing the University of Glasgow’s Institutional Athena SWAN Bronze Award application.

The University of Glasgow is a leading research-intensive institution. Since our Athena SWAN Bronze Award in 2013, we have made great strides towards our aim to be a world-class, world changing University. We recognise that to be successful in this mission, we need to enable our people to make use of their diverse talents, regardless of gender or personal circumstance. For this reason, we put people at the heart of our new strategy: Inspiring People, Changing the World 2015–2020. The ambitions in our strategy require a step-change in our culture and the way we work. The Athena SWAN Action Plan directly supports this process of change.

In the last 3 years we have introduced a number of key initiatives which support women, in particular. These include: an Academic Returners Research Support Scheme providing up to £10k to support academic men and women to resume their research following a period of maternity, additional paternity (now Shared Parental Leave), and adoption leave; sponsorship of 28 aspiring female leaders in academic, and professional and support roles on the Aurora programme; running dedicated promotion workshops on issues shown to disproportionately affect women; and the introduction of a formal mechanism within the promotion process enabling panels to take into account part-time working and career breaks.

…/Cont’d

From the Principal Professor Anton Muscatelli FRSE AcSS

University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ Tel: +44 (0)141 330 5995/4250 Email: [email protected]

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401

mailto:[email protected]

The University reaps the benefits of strong female leadership. Three out of our four Heads of College are female and we have seen a progressive increase in the overall proportion of female Professors from 20% to 24% between 2010 and 2015. Yet, we still have a long way to go. This is particularly true in STEMM disciplines where the proportion of female Professors has been static over the last 4 years, at approximately 19%. Another issue that personally troubles me, in particular, is our gender pay gap amongst Professors. Although we have seen improvements as a result of our actions, we are continually developing our Professorial Zoning process to make adjustments to address this.

We need to accelerate the rate of change. I therefore set a stretching equality objective in the new strategy to grow the proportion of women in senior managerial, professional and professorial roles to at least 33% by 2020. This reflects our ambition to also address the underrepresentation of women in senior professional and support roles.

I chair the Equality and Diversity Strategy Committee (EDSC) which reports to University Court. Early last year EDSC embraced the opportunity to embed the new Athena SWAN Charter principles and tasked the Gender Equality Steering Group (GESG) to apply under the expanded Charter. This was a natural choice for the University. We have always included non-STEMM representation and considerations in gender equality work and planning. The University successfully participated in the ECU’s Gender Equality Charter Mark (GEM) Trial, with the School of Law achieving a Bronze GEM Award in November 2014. The new Charter supports and underpins the continued expansion and roll-out of Athena SWAN principles to AHSSBL disciplines.

We have made good progress since our previous award and recognise that specific challenges remain. I am personally deeply committed to ensuring significant advances continue to be made and am clear the initiatives and activities in this application will support this.

The information presented throughout is an honest, accurate and true representation of the University and I endorse the enclosed submission in the strongest possible terms.

Yours sincerely

(571 words)

From the Principal Professor Anton Muscatelli FRSE AcSS

University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ Tel: +44 (0)141 330 5995/4250 Email: [email protected]

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401

mailto:[email protected]

6

Table 1.1 Glossary of Terms

AHSSBL Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, Business and Law

ALP Academic Leadership Programme

Arts College of Arts

AS Athena SWAN

ASSAT Athena SWAN Self Assessment Team

BPA/SWIP British Philosophical Association and Society for Women in

Philosophy

CMG College Management Group

D@W&SP Dignity at Work and Study Policy

DRI Director of Research Institute

ECDP Early Career Development Programme

ECU Equality Challenge Unit

EdPSC Education Policy and Strategy Committee

EDSC Equality and Diversity Strategy Committee

EDU Equality and Diversity Unit

EHRC Equality and Human Rights Commission

EIA Equality Impact Assessment

EOD Employee and Organisational Development

EWP Extended Workforce Policy

GEC College of MVLS’s Gender Equality Committee

GEM Gender Equality Mark

GEO Gender Equality Officer

GESG Gender Equality Steering Group (formerly ASSAT)

GIRES Gender Identity Research and Education Society

GPWG Gender Pay Working Group

GULGBTQ+ Glasgow University Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer

+ Students’ Association

HoS Head of School

HR Human Resources

HR Committee Human Resources Committee

JSR Job Seeker’s Register

KPI Key Performance Indicator

L&TC Learning and Teaching Committee

LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex

MRIO Marketing, Recruitment and International Office

MVLS College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences

P&DR Performance and Development Review

P&S Professional and Support (Staff)

PGR Postgraduate Research

PGT Postgraduate Taught

PI Principal Investigators

PSED Public Sector Equality Duty

R&BEG Religion and Belief Equality Group

R&T Research and Teaching

7

RF Research Fellow

RI Research Institute(s)

RPSC Research Planning and Strategy Committee

RSIO Research Strategy and Innovation Office

S&E College of Science and Engineering

SAs Senate Assessor(s)

SAT Self Assessment Team (Departmental)

SMG Senior Management Group

SOEG Sexual Orientation Equality Group

SRC Student Representative Council

SS College of Social Sciences

SSDC Student Support Development Committee

STEMM Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Medicine

UG Undergraduate

US University Services

VP Vice-Principal

WIRN Women in Research Network

WLM Workload Model

WP Widening Participation

Table 1.2 – Glasgow Grade Structure and Corresponding Xpert HR and UCEA Levels for University Benchmarking

Grade Xpert HR / UCEA Level

6 Xpert HR Level L

7 Xpert HR Level K

8 Xpert HR Level J

9 Xpert HR Level I

Reader/Prof UCEA Level 5A/B

N.B. We have consulted with XpertHR who confirmed that they are not able to provide benchmarks

by STEMM/Non-STEMM and Gender. They have advised this will be available in future to assist with

additional benchmarking.

8

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTITUTION

Recommended word count: Bronze: 500 words (ACTUAL 484) | Silver: 500 words

Please provide a brief description of the institution, including any relevant contextual information. This

should include:

i) information on where the institution is in the Athena SWAN process

The University achieved its Athena SWAN (AS) Bronze Award in April 2013. Since then we have worked to

implement the Action Plan 2012 making good progress on key objectives, with ongoing work to achieve

remaining actions. Further activities are underway and planned to embed post-May 2015 Charter Principles.

We have supported Schools and Research Institutes (‘departments’) to embed the AS Charter. Currently, 9

STEMM departments hold Awards (2 Silver; 7 Bronze). 1 AHSSBL department holds an AS Bronze Award,

translated from Bronze GEM Award. 6 STEMM departments have awards pending and 6 STEMM and 3

AHSSBL departments are working towards submissions in 2016/17.

Equality Governance

Gender Equality Steering Group (GESG) is responsible for progressing gender equality across the institution

and preparing the University Athena SWAN submission. GESG reports to the University’s Equality and

Diversity Strategy Committee (EDSC). EDSC, chaired by the Principal, meets 3 times/year and reports,

through the Human Resources (HR) Committee, to University Court (University’s governing body). EDSC has

membership drawn from across the University including representatives from Trades Unions and student

bodies. EDSC includes an Equality Champion for each protected group under the Equality Act 2010. Each

Champion is a member of the University’s SMG and convenes a group to consider issues in their equality

area.

(ii) information on its teaching and its research focus

The University is ranked 62nd in the world and is the first and only UK university to be rated as 5 Stars Plus

overall in QS World University Rankings (2015). It is rated 3rd

in the UK for international student satisfaction

(among universities participating in the International Student Barometer Summer 2013) and welcomes

students from over 140 countries.

The University is research-intensive, with annual research income of more than £181m. Research and

Teaching is delivered by Schools and Research Institutes (Schools/RIs) based in 4 Colleges: College of Arts

(Arts), College of Social Sciences (SS), College of Science and Engineering (S&E) and the College of Medical,

Veterinary and Life Sciences (MVLS). The University conducts world-leading research in STEMM and AHSSBL

and strives towards multidisciplinarity, encouraging collaboration across all Colleges.

The University set out an ambitious new plan in its Inspiring People, Changing the World University Strategy

2015-2020 putting our People, Place and Purpose at the heart of our core mission to ‘bring inspiring people

together and create a world-class environment for learning and research, empowering staff and students

alike to discover and share knowledge that can change the world’.

A key feature of the strategy is a stretching KPI to increase the proportion of women in senior managerial,

professional and professorial roles to at least 33% by 2020.

9

College of Medical, Veterinary and Life

Sciences • Sch. of Life Sciences

• Sch. of Medicine

• Sch. of Veterinary Medicine

• RI Biodiversity, Animal Health & Comparative

Medicine

• RI Cancer Sciences

• RI Cardiovascular & Medical Sciences

• RI Infection, Immunity & Inflammation

of Health and Well-Being

• RI Molecular, Cell and Systems Biology

• RI Neuroscience and Psychology

College of Social Sciences

• Adam Smith Business School

• Sch. of Education

• Sch. of Interdisciplinary Studies

• Sch. of Law

• Sch. of Social and Political Sciences

College of Arts

• Sch. of Critical Studies

• Sch. of Culture and Creative Arts

• Sch. of Humanities

• Sch. of Modern Languages and Cultures

College of Science and Engineering • Sch. of Chemistry

• Sch. of Computing Science

• Sch. of Engineering

• Sch. of Geographical & Earth Sciences

• Sch. of Maths & Statistics

• Sch. of Physics & Astronomy

• Sch. of Psychology

• Scottish Universities Environment Research

Centre

UNIVERSITY

Research and

Teaching

(iii) the number of staff. Present data for academic and professional and support staff separately

The University currently employs 7704 staff; 3260 Academic; 282 Clinical Academic and 4162 Professional

and Support (P&S) Staff:

Table 2.1 University Academic and Professional and Support Staff by Gender as at February 2016

Staff Type

Female Male Total

No. % No. %

Research and Teaching 1501 46% 1759 54% 3260

Clinical 136 48% 146 52% 282

Professional and Support Staff 2583 62% 1579 38% 4162

(iv) the total number of departments and total number of students

The University’s 4 Colleges have 19 constituent Schools (10 STEMM; 9 AHSSBL) and 8 Research

Institutes/Centres (8 STEMM). The University hosts a large student population with 17854 Undergraduate

(UG); 4894 Postgraduate Taught (PGT) and 2006 Postgraduate Research (PGR) students in 2014/15.

10

(v) list and sizes of science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine (STEMM) and arts, humanities,

social science, business and law (AHSSBL) departments. Present data for academic and support staff

separately

Table 2.2: Size of STEMM and AHSSBL Departments incl. Staff (Headcount) and Students (FTE)-

School/Research Institute Staff (Headcount) Students

(FTE) Academic Clinical Prof & Support

STEMM

Sch. of Life Sciences 61 - 67 2497

Sch. of Medicine 120 187 136 2342

Sch. of Veterinary Medicine 134 - 209 815

Inst. Biodiversity, Animal Health

and Comparative Medicine 138 - 59 113

Inst. Cancer Sciences 126 42 67 139

Inst. Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences 125 47 85 209

Inst. Infection, Immunity and Inflammation 324 30 156 264

Inst. of Health and Well-Being 269 41 162 389

Inst. Molecular, Cell and Systems Biology 94 1 41 104

Inst. of Neuroscience and Psychology 100 6 22 63

Sch. of Chemistry 99 - 43 1348

Sch. of Computing Science 94 - 21 906

Sch. of Engineering 233 - 115 1885

Sch. of Geographical & Earth Sciences 70 - 22 1086

Sch. of Maths & Statistics 67 - 17 1715

Sch. of Physics & Astronomy 149 - 71 1549

Sch. of Psychology 30 - 14 1489

SUERC 46 - 48 8

AHSSBL

Sch. of Critical Studies 97 - 37 2109

Sch. of Culture and Creative Arts 82 - 29 1437

Sch. of Humanities 112 - 60 3202

Sch. of Modern Languages and Cultures 159 - 60 2162

Adam Smith Business School 132 - 69 4162

Sch. of Education 167 - 54 2681

Sch. of Interdisciplinary Studies 30 - 18 348

Sch. of Law 58 - 27 1754

Sch. of Social and Political Sciences 160 - 72 3163

11

3. THE SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCESS

Recommended word count: Bronze: 1000 words (ACTUAL 787 words) | Silver: 1000 words

Describe the self-assessment process. This should include:

(i) a description of the self-assessment team

The University’s 2012 Bronze submission was prepared by the Athena SWAN (AS) Self-Assessment Team

(‘ASSAT’). It comprised members of staff dedicated to AS principles from all Colleges, career-levels and work-

life balance experiences. In November 2013 Professor Anne Anderson, Vice-Principal, Head of the College of

Social Sciences and SMG member took over the role of University’s Gender Equality Champion.

The ASSAT structure naturally evolved becoming the Gender Equality Steering Group (GESG) during

implementation of our original Action Plan, to reflect the wider scope of AS principles and growing capacity

across the University. The majority of additional members joined voluntarily as a result of their interest and

work on gender equality. Gender balance improved to 40% male membership.

GESG, which reports to EDSC, was formed in January 2014 to:

• Facilitate cultural change whereby gender equality for staff and students is embedded in all

University functions.

• Support the University to achieve KPIs relating to growing the percentage of female staff in

Senior and Professorial positions.

• Implement University’s AS Action Plan and prepare future University submissions.

• Assist with focus groups/surveys towards development and implementation of University’s

Action Plan.

• Provide critical readership of ‘departmental’

applications and action plans pre-submission.

• Oversee other gender equality initiatives in line with University’s Public Sector Equality Duty and

University’s Equality and Diversity Policy.

Membership of GESG is detailed in Table 3.1. GESG includes academic, and non-academic representation

from all 4 Colleges, Research Strategy and Innovation Office, Equality and Diversity Unit, University Court,

Student Representative Council, and Corporate Human Resources. All academic representatives are

members of AHSSBL and STEMM departmental SATs and College-level gender equality groups.

Several members hold senior positions. This helps with the diffusion of gender equality across ‘departments’

and Colleges. All Heads of HR sit on GESG to act as conduits between GESG and College Management Groups

(CMGs). The University Researcher Development Manager ensures views are fed up to GESG from the

Postdoctoral Forum and across from the University Researcher Development Committee.

12

Table 3.1: GESG Membership

SAT Member M

/

F

Job title and Department Experience of Athena SWAN

Principles

Dr Elizabeth Adams

F

Researcher Development Manager

(Research Strategy and Innovation

Office)

•

.

Kirstine Adams/Mhairi

Taylor

F Equality and Diversity Manager •

.

Prof. Lynn Abrams

F Professor of Modern History

(Head of Subject)

Prof. Anne Anderson F Vice-Principal, Head of College of

Social Sciences and University Gender

Equality Champion

(GESG (ASSAT) Chair)

•

Prof. Michael Brady

M Professor of Philosophy

•

Fergus Brown

M Human Resources Manager, College

of Medical, Veterinary and Life

Sciences

•

Una Marie Darragh F Student Representative Council

(SRC)

Vice-Principal (Student Support)

•

Morag Deans F SRC Gender Equality Officer •

Dr Ruth Dukes F Senior Lecturer (Law) •

13

Prof. Lindsay Farmer M Professor of Law •

Dr Katie Farrell F Gender Equality Officer •

Prof. Lyndsay Fletcher F Professor (Physics and Astronomy)

Janell Kelly F Equality and Diversity Administrator

(Clerk to GESG)

•

Dr Cindy Gray F Lord Kelvin Adam Smith Fellow

(Health and Well-Being- Social

Sciences)

•

Dr Steve Marritt M Lecturer (Medieval History) •

Prof. John Marsh M Head of the School of Engineering •

Dr Ian MacLaren M Senior Lecturer (Physics and

Astronomy)

•

Paul Paterson M Chief Technician •

14

•

Dr Joelle Prunet F Senior Lecturer (Chemistry) •

Elaine Reid F Human Resources Manager, College

of Social Sciences

•

Gillian Shaw F Human Resources Manager, College

of Arts

•

Dr Linnea Soler F University Teacher (Chemistry) •

David Tedman M Human Resources Manager, College

of Medical, Veterinary and Life

Sciences

•

Dr Paul Welsh M Postdoctoral Research Associate,

Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences

•

Simon Wilson M Human Resources Manager, College

of Science and Engineering

•

15

(ii) an account of the self-assessment process

The ASSAT continued acting as the self-assessment team to implement the Bronze Action Plan and assess

progress, meeting 3 times/year until January 2014 when GESG was formed.

GESG has met 10 times between January 2014-March 2016 to review the University’s progress in realising its

gender equality initiatives and ambitions, as well as planning future activities in line with key priorities.

Consultation across the institution, in conjunction with external consultation and networking, have informed

the development of this Bronze submission:

• Data from University Staff Survey 2014 were disaggregated by gender and job family (60% response rate

- ~3400 respondents) and analysed to inform the assessment.

• Data from the Careers in Research Online Survey 2015 have been disaggregated by gender and fed into

action planning.

• A series of AS Consultation Workshops were held with academic and P&S staff between November–

December 2015 on key issues raised in AS, with specific events relating to flexibility and managing career

breaks (Parents and Carers) and mentoring, P&DR and promotion (Key Career Transition Points and

Development):

• Parents and Carers Workshop (2 sessions)

• Key Career Transition Points and Career Development Session

• Embedding Athena SWAN Principles: Professional and Support Staff

• Embedding Athena SWAN Principles: Research Staff Perspective

• Embedding Athena SWAN Principles at Dumfries Campus

• Embedding Athena SWAN Principles at Garscube Campus

Workshops were led by the Gender Equality Champion (VP) and run across the University’s three main

campuses, with 127 registered participants.

• Since our original award, 13 Departments have undertaken culture surveys to inform their local AS

action plans. Themes arising from those surveys and submissions have informed our self-assessment.

• Feedback from AS Medical Schools Scotland Workshop, hosted by MVLS and the Equality Challenge Unit

in November 2015. The Vice-Principal, Head of the College of MVLS also chaired the Medical Schools

Council Gender Working Group and informs the University about national best practice arising from this

work.

• Discussions and best practice shared at the Regional AS Scotland Network.

• Presentations and subsequent discussion on women’s progression in academia hosted by Women in

Research Network (WIRN) and Departmental SATs, delivered by:

16

• Professor Jane Norman (VP and AS Lead, University of Edinburgh);

• Professor Dr June McCombie (Senior Researcher, University of Nottingham and Chairperson of

Project Juno 2008-12);

• Professor Barbara Turnbull (AS Lead, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham).

(iii) plans for the future of the self-assessment team

GESG will continue to meet at least 3 times/ year to implement the Action Plan and develop further

actions to progress gender equality. Membership will be reviewed every 3 years to make sure that it

remains representative, to maximise contributions from new members and to ensure that members are

not overburdened as their Departmental SAT roles evolve (Action 1.1). GESG will continue to report to

the University Court via EDSC and HR Committee.

GESG will produce an annual report on the progress of the Action Plan to be shared with the AS

Network, Departmental SATs and CMGs (Action 1.2). The annual report will also be shared at an AS

reception to be hosted by the Principal, which will communicate AS activities to the wider University

community as well as recognise the contributions and achievements of AS SATs and leads across the

institution (Action 1.3).

The Group shall continue to support Departmental SAT activity via critical readership of submissions,

sharing of best practice through the AS Network, CMGs and relevant Committees.

17

4. A PICTURE OF THE INSTITUTION

Recommended word count: Bronze: ACTUAL 2246 words | Silver: 3000 words

4.1 Academic and research staff data

(i) Academic and research staff by grade and gender

Look at the career pipeline across the whole institution and between STEMM and AHSSBL subjects. Comment

on and explain any differences between women and men, and any differences between STEMM and AHSSBL

subjects. Identify any issues in the pipeline at particular grades/levels.

Table 4.1. University Academic Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

University

Total

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

FEMALE MALE % F FEMALE MALE % F FEMALE MALE %F

GRADE 6 (G6) 208 125 62% 231 169 58% 202 184 52%

GRADE 7 (G7) 318 329 49% 373 349 52% 406 367 53%

GRADE 8 (G8) 230 259 47% 252 264 49% 252 278 48%

GRADE 9 (G9) 137 212 39% 144 223 39% 151 236 39%

READER 31 61 34% 32 72 31% 32 74 30%

PROF 85 313 21% 92 320 22% 104 326 24%

TOTAL 1009 1299 44% 1124 1397 45% 1147 1465 44%

Figure 1.1 Female % of Academic Staff at the University with National Average Comparator 2012/13 – 2014/15

The proportion of G7-8 females increased over the reporting period. Progress was made with the number of

women at G9 and Professor; the latter increasing by 22% since 2012/13 (from 85 to 104).

Despite this, women become underrepresented at G9. This is particularly noticeable at G9 and

Reader�Professor and in comparison to the national picture. Female proportions at each grade are similar

to or higher than the national average, save at G9 where women constitute only 39% compared to 51%

nationally.

62%

49% 47%

39% 34%

21%

58%52% 49%

39%

31%22%

52%

53%

48%39%

30%24%

38%

48% 50% 51%

23%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

GRADE 6 GRADE 7 GRADE 8 GRADE 9 READER PROF

Female Percentage of Academic Staff in University

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

NATIONAL

18

The University introduced the Early Career Development Programme (ECDP) in 2014. Newly appointed

academic staff at G7-8 are developed and mentored towards G9 through ECDP for a period of up to 8 and 5

years, respectively. There are 44 women and 35 men at G7 and 21 women and 32 men at G8 on ECDP. We

are rolling ECDP out to all academic functions and contract types; this bodes well for the female pipeline to

G9.

The University set an ambitious target to grow the proportion of women in senior professional, managerial

and professorial roles to 33% by 2020.We are working towards this through more diverse recruitment,

targeted development and support for progression as outlined throughout this submission.

AHSSBL Academic Pipeline

Table 4.2 AHSSBL Academic Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

AHSSBL 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


GRADE 6 43 29 60% 57 31 65% 50 37 57%

GRADE 7 85 76 53% 97 77 56% 107 82 57%

GRADE 8 122 96 56% 137 97 59% 131 98 57%

GRADE 9 69 67 51% 70 66 51% 80 73 52%

READER 12 18 40% 13 24 35% 11 29 28%

PROF 44 134 25% 52 138 27% 61 138 31%

TOTAL 375 420 47% 426 433 50% 440 457 49%

Figure 1.2 Female Percentage of AHSSBL Academic Staff 2012/13 – 2014/15

Women predominate across G6-9 and drop-off at Reader, with a stark decline at G9�Professor. However,

the proportion of female Professors increased from 25% in 2012/13 to 31% in 2014/15.

60%

53%

56%51%

40%

25%

65%

56% 59%51%

35% 27%

57%57%

57%52%

28%

31%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


Female Percentage of AHSSBL Academic Staff

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

19

Men are slightly underrepresented at G6-8. Although overrepresented at Reader and Professor, we will

improve safeguards against potential bias for male applicants in recruitment and promotion at earlier career

stages (Actions 2.1.1-2).

Promotion data (s.5.1(iii)) highlight good female progression to Professor over the period (13 female v 8

male promotions to Professor) and reflects the impact of actions in AHSSBL, including:

• Promotion Workshops targeted at issues known to impact women;

• Cross-College Women’s Mentoring Scheme in AHSSBL;

• Sponsorship of 8 female academics on LFHE Aurora programme.

STEMM Academic Pipeline

Table 4.3 STEMM Academic Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Figure 1.3 Female Percentage of STEMM Academic Staff 2012/13 – 2014/15

STEMM G6-7 show changes towards good gender balance over the period. Female underrepresentation

begins at G8, reflecting the difficult transition from Postdoctoral Researcher�Lecturer/Independent

Researcher and is striking at G9 and Reader�Professor.

63%

48% 40%

32% 31%

19%

56%50%

41%

32%28%

18%

51%51%

40%

30% 32%

19%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


Female Percentage of STEMM Academic Staff

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

STEMM 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


GRADE 6 165 96 63% 174 138 56% 152 147 51%

GRADE 7 233 253 48% 276 272 50% 299 285 51%

GRADE 8 108 163 40% 115 167 41% 121 180 40%

GRADE 9 68 145 32% 74 157 32% 71 163 30%

READER 19 43 31% 19 48 28% 21 45 32%

PROF 41 179 19% 40 182 18% 43 188 19%

TOTAL 634 879 42% 698 964 42% 707 1008 41%

20

The proportion of female Professors was static over the period. Although mirroring the STEMM national

average (18.5%)1, this is a concern.

Female STEMM academics are more successful than men at promotion to Professor but are

underrepresented as applicants for Professorial vacancies. In addition to supporting Postdoctoral women

towards G8 and above (s.5.2), we will revise recruitment campaigns to attract a more diverse applicant pool

(Actions 2.2.1 (i-iii)).

Clinical Academic Pipeline

Table 4.4. Clinical Academic Staff by Role and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

CLINICAL ACADEMIC

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


UNIVERSITY TEACHER 7 6 54% 9 5 64% 8 5 62%

SNR UNIVERSITY TEACHER 3 4 43% 4 5 44% 5 5 50%

RESEARCH FELLOW (RF) 31 34 48% 40 31 56% 46 37 55%

LECTURER 14 21 40% 15 18 45% 16 19 46%

SNR LECTURER/RF 14 18 44% 15 15 50% 15 18 45%

READER 1 8 11% 0 9 0% 0 6 0%

PROFESSOR 11 46 19% 12 45 21% 13 49 21%

TOTAL 81 137 37% 95 128 43% 103 139 43%

Figure 1.4 Female Percentage of Clinical Academic Staff 2012/13 – 2014/15

1 Equality in Higher Education: Statistical Reports 2015: Part 1 Staff, Equality Challenge Unit.

54%

43%48%

40% 44%

11%19%

64%

44%

56%

45%50%

0%

21%

62%

50%55%

46% 45%

0%

21%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Female Percentage of Clinical Staff in University 2012/13 -

2014/152012/13

2013/14

2014/15

21

Table 4.5 Clinical Academic Staff by Gender w/National Comparator

2 2012/13 – 2014/15

CLINICAL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 NATIONAL

FEMALE MALE % F FEMALE MALE % F FEMALE MALE %F FEMALE MALE %F

LECTURER 14 21 40% 15 18 45% 16 19 46% 257 357 42%

SNR LECTURER/READER 15 26 37% 15 24 38% 15 24 38% 447 918 33%

PROFESSOR 11 46 19% 12 45 21% 13 49 21% 254 1193 18%

TOTAL 81 137 37% 95 128 43% 103 139 43% 958 2468 28%

Figure 1.5 Clinical Academic Staff by Gender w/National Comparator 2012/13 – 2014/15

Women are slightly underrepresented; constituting 43% of Clinical academic workforce. Although numbers

are small, there is a reasonable gender balance amongst Clinical Senior University Teachers and

Lecturer/Senior Lecturers, with a steady increase of women to these positions (Fig.1.4).

Clinical Research Fellows (RFs) are typically clinicians undertaking PhDs, accounting for larger numbers. The

RF�Clinical Lecturer is a key transition. We lose Clinical women at Lecturer, and Senior Lecturer, followed by

a sharp decline at Professors.

Encouragingly, University female Clinical academics are better represented at every level, when

compared nationally (Table4.5; Fig.1.5).

However, support for retention and progression is vital to feed the Clinical pipeline. Recent initiatives in

MVLS, where Clinical staff are based, include enhanced mentoring and guidance on the transition to Clinical

Lecturer, a step where women drop-off the pipeline. The University’s revised mentoring scheme will include

Clinical staff (Action 3.2.4).

2 Medical Schools Council (2015) A Survey of Staffing Levels of Medical Clinical Academics in UK Medical Schools as at 31

July 2014.

40%37%

19%

37%

45%

38%

21%

43%46%

38%

21%

43%42%

33%

18%

28%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

LECTURER SENIOR

LECTURER/READER

PROFESSOR TOTAL

%

Clinical Academic Pipeline with National Benchmark Data

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

NATIONAL

22

MVLS HR developed a Clinical Academic appraisal section, on behalf of Scottish medical schools, included in

the NHS Scottish Online Appraisal Resource (SOAR), for rollout in May 2016. This should strengthen

development discussions for the advancement of Clinical academic staff.

The University is developing an Academic Clinician Career Pathway. Initial Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)

suggests consideration of clinical work on a pro-rata basis will remove a potential promotion barrier.

Additional work will assess this path from a gender-perspective (Action 3.2.4).

Action 3.2.4

Academic Clinician Pathway Working Group to complete EIA of the Academic Clinician

Career Pathway: specific consideration of gender to consider impact of career breaks and

gender segregation across Clinical specialities

23

INTERSECTIONALITY

The University has a low population of BME staff3 (10.2%), slightly higher than the UK average (~9%). Similar

to the UK picture, BME academic women are underrepresented.

Table 4.6 Total Academic Staff by Gender and Race Group w/National Comparator4 2012/13 – 2014/15

WHITE BME UNKNOWN

2012/13

FEMALE 833 81.6% 69 6.8% 119 11.7%

MALE 1009 77.7% 115 8.9% 174 13.4%

TOTAL 1842 79.4% 1842 7.9% 3684 12.6%

2013/14

FEMALE 926 81.6% 86 7.6% 123 10.8%

MALE 1088 77.1% 148 10.5% 1236 12.4%

TOTAL 2014 79.1% 234 9.2% 298 11.7%

2014/15

FEMALE 1110 80.3% 116 8.4% 157 11.4%

MALE 1252 75.9% 192 11.6% 206 12.5%

TOTAL 2362 77.9% 308 10.2% 363 12.0%

NATIONAL

FEMALE 72065 83.5% 7555 8.8% 6690 7.8%

MALE 84380 80.0% 11225 10.6% 9865 9.4%

TOTAL 156445 81.6% 18780 9.8% 16555 8.6%

Figure 1.6 Total Academic Staff by Gender and Race Group w/National Comparator 2012/13 – 2014/15

The proportion of all staff whose Race is unknown/withheld is higher than the proportion identifying as BME

for academic staff overall.

We will continue to encourage staff disclosure to enhance our analysis and understanding of

intersectionality (Action 4.1). Table 4.7 and Figs.1.7-9 below show the data disaggregated by gender and

grade.

3 Data drawn from University Equality Monitoring Report, correct as at mid-August each year.

4 Source, supra. n.1

81.6%

77.7%

79.4%

81.6%

77.1%

79.1%

80.3%

75.9%

77.9%

83.5%

80.0%

81.6%

6.8%

8.9%

7.9%

7.6%

10.5%

9.2%

8.4%

11.6%

10.2%

8.8%

10.6%

9.8%

11.7%

13.4%

12.6%

10.8%

12.4%

11.7%

11.4%

12.5%

12.0%

7.8%

9.4%

8.6%

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

Total Academic Staff by Gender and Race

WHITE

BME

UNKNOWN

24

Table 4.7 University Academic Staff by Grade, Race Group and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE

G6

WHITE 157 (74.4%) 86 (68.8%) 175 (76.1%) 118 (70.7%) 232 (71.8%) 185 (69.0%)

BME 16 (7.6%) 19 (15.2%) 20 (8.7%) 31 (18.6%) 34 (10.5%) 48 (17.9%)

UNKNOWN 38 (18.0%) 20 (16.0%) 35 (15.2%) 18 (10.8%) 57 (17.6%) 35 (13.1%)

TOTAL 211 (100%) 125 (100%) 230 (100%) 167 (100%) 323 (100%) 268 (100%)

G7

WHITE 252 (79.0%) 221 (67.8%) 292 (77.9%) 234 (66.5%) 376 (78.0%) 281 (65.0%)

BME 31 (9.7%) 44 (13.5%) 40 (10.7%) 62 (17.6%) 53 (11.0%) 83 (19.2%)

UNKNOWN 36 (11.3%) 61 (18.7%) 43 (11.5%) 56 (15.9%) 53 (11.0%) 68 (15.7%)

TOTAL 319 (100%) 326 (100%) 375 (100%) 352 (100%) 482 (100%) 432 (100%)

G8

WHITE 197 (85.3%) 216 (83.4%) 219 (85.9%) 224 (84.2%) 243 (86.2%) 247 (84.0%)

BME 12 (5.2%) 16 (6.2%) 15 (5.9%) 14 (5.3%) 16 (5.7%) 18 (6.1%)

UNKNOWN 22 (9.5%) 27 (10.4%) 21 (8.2%) 28 (10.5%) 23 (8.2%) 29 (9.9%)

TOTAL 231 (100%) 259 (100%) 255 (100%) 266 (100%) 282 (100%) 294 (100%)

G9

WHITE 156 (88.6%) 232 (83.5%) 162 (87.6%) 254 (82.5%) 172 (87.3%) 268 (82.0%)

BME 6 (3.4%) 21 (7.6%) 5 (2.7%) 25 (8.1%) 7 (3.6%) 28 (8.6%)

UNKNOWN 14 (8.0%) 25 (9.0%) 18 (9.7%) 29 (9.4%) 18 (9.1%) 31 (9.5%)

TOTAL 176 (100%) 278 (100%) 185 (100%) 308 (100%) 197 (100%) 327 (100%)

PROF

WHITE 71 (84.5%) 254 (81.9%) 78 (86.7%) 258 (81.1%) 87 (87.9%) 271 (82.4%)

BME 4 (4.8%) 15 (4.8%) 6 (6.7%) 16 (5.0%) 6 (6.1%) 15 (4.6%)

UNKNOWN 9 (10.7%) 41 (13.2%) 6 (6.7%) 44 (13.8%) 6 (6.1%) 43 (13.1%)

TOTAL 84 (100%) 310 (100%) 90 (100%) 318 (100%) 99 (100%) 329 (100%)

TOTAL

WHITE 833 (81.6%) 1009 (77.7%) 926 (81.6%) 1088 (77.1%) 1110 (80.3%) 1252 (75.9%)

BME 69 (6.8%) 115 (8.9%) 86 (7.6%) 148 (10.5%) 116 (8.4%) 192 (11.6%)

UNKNOWN 119 (11.7%) 174 (13.4%) 123 (10.8%) 175 (12.4%) 157 (11.4%) 206 (12.5%)

25

Figure 1.7 Academic Staff by Grade, Race and Gender 2012-13

5


5 Grades 9 and Reader have been combined here due to the extremely low numbers of BME staff at those Grades. They

are within the same Grade band.

74.4%

68.8%

79.0%

67.8%

85.3%

83.4%

88.6%

83.5%

84.5%

81.9%

81.6%

77.7%

7.6%

15.2%

9.7%

13.5%

5.2%

6.2%

3.4%

7.6%

4.8%

4.8%

6.8%

8.9%

18.0%

16.0%

11.3%

18.7%

9.5%

10.4%

8.0%

9.0%

10.7%

13.2%

11.7%

13.4%

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

GR

AD

E 6

GR

AD

E 7

GR

AD

E 8

GR

AD

E 9

PR

OF

TO

TA

L

Academic Staff by Grade, Gender and Race 2012/13

WHITE

BME

UNKOWN

76.1%

70.7%

77.9%

66.5%

85.9%

84.2%

87.6%

82.5%

86.7%

81.1%

81.6%

77.1%

8.7%

18.6%

10.7%

17.6%

5.9%

5.3%

2.7%

8.1%

6.7%

4.8%

7.6%

10.5%

15.2%

10.8%

11.5%

15.9%

8.2%

10.5%

9.7%

9.4%

6.7%

13.8%

10.8%

12.4%

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

GR

AD

E 6

GR

AD

E 7

GR

AD

E 8

GR

AD

E 9

PR

OF

TO

TA

L


WHITE

BME

UNKOWN

26


Data above show an increase in female and male BME staff at G6-7. This pattern is also observed, to a lesser

degree, at G8-Professor.

There are proportionately fewer female BME staff at G6-7 and 9. G8 and Professor male/female BME staff

proportions are broadly similar. Figs.1.6-9 highlight the substantial drop in male and female BME staff after

G7.

Table 4.8 and Fig.1.10 show, similarly, the majority of Clinical academic staff6 identify as white. The

proportion of female Clinical BME staff is extremely low and less than half that of males, when considered as

a proportion of overall staff at each gender.

Table 4.8 Clinical Staff by Race and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

CLINICAL FEMALE % F MALE % M TOTAL % TOTAL

2012/13

WHITE 90 73.2% 113 70.6% 203 71.7%

BME 8 6.5% 23 14.4% 31 11.0%

UNKOWN 25 20.3% 24 15.0% 49 17.3%

TOTAL 123 100.0% 160 100.0% 283 100.0%

2013/14

WHITE 98 72.1% 112 71.8% 210 71.9%

BME 8 5.9% 22 14.1% 30 10.3%

UNKOWN 30 22.1% 22 14.1% 52 17.8%

TOTAL 136 100.0% 156 100.0% 292 100.0%

2014/15

WHITE 112 72.7% 115 70.1% 227 71.4%

BME 7 4.5% 21 12.8% 28 8.8%

UNKOWN 35 22.7% 28 17.1% 63 19.8%

TOTAL 154 100.0% 164 100.0% 318 100.0%

6 Clinical Staff aggregated here because when disaggregated by role, the BME population is too small to report or

analyse meaningfully.

71.8%

69.0%

77.9%

65.0%

85.9%

84.2%

87.3%

82.0%

87.9%

82.4%

80.3%

75.9%

10.5%

17.9%

10.7%

19.2%

5.9%

6.1%

3.6%

8.6%

6.1%

4.6%

8.4%

11.6%

17.6%

13.1%

11.5%

15.9%

8.2%

9.9%

9.1%

9.5%

6.1%

13.1%

11.4%

12.5%

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

FEMALE

MALE

GR

AD

E 6

GR

AD

E 7

GR

AD

E 8

GR

AD

E 9

PR

OF

TO

TA

L


WHITE

BME

UNKOWN

27

Figure 1.10 Clinical Staff by Race and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Benchmark data show BME Clinical academic staff proportions at around 17% in England and Wales, and

12% in Scotland7. The University’s Clinical BME staff population is much lower at approximately 9% in

2014/15.

The University previously used each protected characteristic as a distinct lens through which to view

equality. The existing equality committees will collaborate to explore intersectionality, initially at the

intersection of race/gender, using AS and Race Equality Charter principles (Action 4.1.2).

Action 4.1.2

Race Equality Charter to provide framework to explore intersectionality of gender and

race re: attraction, retention and experiences of male and female BME staff including

further staff consultation to examine key issues.

7 Supra. n2

73.2%

70.6%

71.7%

72.1%

71.8%

71.9%

72.7%

70.1%

71.4%

6.5%

14.4%

11.0%

5.9%

14.1%

10.3%

4.5%

12.8%

8.8%

20.3%

15.0%

17.3%

22.1%

14.1%

17.8%

22.7%

17.1%

19.8%

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

FEMALE

MALE

TOTAL

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

Clinical Staff by Race and Gender 2012/13 - 2014/15

WHITE

BME

UNKOWN

28

(ii) Academic and research staff on fixed-term, open-ended/permanent and zero-hour contracts by gender

Comment on the proportions of men and women on these contracts. Comment on what is being done to

ensure continuity of employment and to address any other issues, including redeployment schemes.

Fixed-term contracts are normally used to cover maternity or sickness leave, or posts lasting less than a year.

Researchers employed on projects with end-dates are, generally, employed on open-ended-with-funding-

end-date contracts, offering more security than rolling fixed-term contracts.

The University has reduced its use of zero-hours and causal workers. In 2015 we introduced the Extended

Workforce Policy (EWP). Consequently, significant numbers of zero-hours and sessional staff were

transferred onto fractional and fixed-term contracts, offering greater employment security to those

previously employed on a zero-hour basis.

Table 4.9 AHSSBL Academic Staff by Contract Status and Gender w/National Comparator 2012/13 –2014/15

FIXED TERM8 OPEN ENDED (PERM)

FEMALE MALE TOTAL FEMALE MALE TOTAL

2012/13 AHSSBL 133 59% 91 41% 224 243 42% 329 58% 572

2013/14 AHSSBL 163 63% 97 37% 260 264 44% 336 56% 600

2014/15 AHSSBL 164 53% 144 47% 308 277 45% 343 55% 620

NATIONAL NON-SET 15030 54% 12780 46% 27810 29285 48% 32175 52% 61460

Figure 1.11 AHSSBL Staff by Contract Type and Gender w/National Comparator 2012/13 –2014/15

Table 4.9 and Fig.1.11 show broadly similar male/female proportions of AHSSBL staff on fixed-term and

open-ended contracts, now reflecting the national picture, with women slightly underrepresented amongst

open-ended staff.

8 Fixed-Term and Open-Ended-Funding-End Date contract numbers have been combined.

59%63%

53% 54%

42% 44% 45%48%

41% 37%

47% 46%

58% 56% 55% 52%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15NATIONAL 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15NATIONAL

FIXED TERM OPEN ENDED (PERM)AHSSBL

AHSSBL Academic Staff by Contract Type and Gender

FEMALE

MALE

29

Table 4.10 STEMM Academic and Research Staff by Contract Status and Gender w/National Comparator 2012/13 –

2014/15

FIXED TERM OPEN ENDED (PERM)


2012/13 STEMM 392 49% 411 51% 803 252 35% 474 65% 726

2013/14 STEMM 446 49% 473 51% 919 261 34% 504 66% 765

2014/15 STEMM 452 47% 514 53% 966 264 34% 509 66% 773

NATIONAL SET 18685 44% 23545 56% 42230 26225 39% 40615 61% 66840

Figure 1.12 STEMM Academic Staff by Contract Status and Gender w/National Comparator 2012/13 –2014/15

STEMM females are underrepresented on open-ended contracts. The University data is lower than the

national average, with male/female proportions more similar to STEMM R&T picture (Table4.17).

The gender distribution for fixed-term contracts is broadly even and slightly more balanced than the national

average. It reflects the gender distribution of STEMM Research staff at the University (Table 4.18), as most

Research staff will be employed on open-ended-with-funding-end-date contracts.

49% 49%47%

44%

35% 34% 34%

39%

51% 51% 53% 56%

65% 66% 66%61%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15NATIONAL 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15NATIONAL

FIXED TERM OPEN ENDED (PERM)STEMM

STEMM Academic Staff by Contract Type and Gender

FEMALE

MALE

30

Table 4.11 Clinical Academic Staff by Contract Status and Gender



2012/13 CLINICAL 54 47% 60 53% 114 72 42% 101 58% 173

2013/14 CLINICAL 62 53% 54 47% 116 76 43% 99 57% 175

2014/15 CLINICAL 56 55% 46 45% 102 80 45% 96 55% 176

Figure 1.13 Clinical Academic Staff by Contract Status and Gender 2012/13 –2014/15

Women constitute a small majority of fixed-term Clinical staff. This reflects female Clinical RF proportions,

which increased over the period. The position is inverted for open-ended contracts, although an

improvement compared to trends for non-clinical academics.

To maximise continuity of employment for staff on fixed-term contracts, we provide comprehensive training

and support. We also strive to redeploy these staff through the Job Seeker’s Register (JSR). Principal

Investigators (PIs) and managers are required to first consult the JSR when recruiting; existing staff on the

JSR meeting the criteria for a post will, ordinarily, be invited to interview.

14% of eligible female, compared with 20% of eligible male employees, registered for JSR between October

2015-March 2016. To address low JSR registration rates we will target staff, particularly female staff, through

their PIs, managers and local HR team (Action 2.2.2).

Action 2.2.2

Improve the use of Job Seekers Register, targeting eligible female staff and staff on

fixed-term contracts

47%

53% 55%

42% 43%45%

53%47% 45%

58% 57% 55%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


CLINICAL

Clinical Academic Staff by Contract Type and GenderFEMALE

MALE

31

(iii) Academic staff by contract function and gender: research-only, research and teaching, and teaching-

only. Comment on the proportions of men and women on these contracts and by job grade.

AHSSBL:

Table 4.12 UofG AHSSBL Staff by Contract Function and Gender w/National Comparator

AHSSBL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 NATIONAL

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

R&T 40% 60% 41% 59% 43% 57% 46% 54%

Research 56% 44% 57% 43% 54% 46% 55% 45%

Teaching 61% 39% 66% 34% 62% 38% 55% 45%

Figure 1.14 UofG AHSSBL Staff by Contract Function and Gender w/National Comparator

Women are underrepresented in R&T and slightly less at the University than nationally. However, R&T

females have increased from 40% to 43%.

Women now constitute a small majority of Research staff (54%) and have consistently predominated in

Teaching (61%;66%;62%). There has been little change to the gender distribution of Teaching staff.

To raise the profile of Teaching and ensure it achieves parity of esteem in our research-intensive

environment, we developed new Teaching promotion criteria. The Teaching track historically proved

40% 41%43%

46%

56% 57%54% 55%

61%

66%

62%

55%

60% 59% 57% 54%

44% 43% 46% 45%39%

34%38%

45%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

Research & Teaching Research Teaching

AHSSBL Academic Staff by Contract Function and Gender

2012/13 -2014/15 FEMALE

MALE

University’s 3 main career tracks for Research and Teaching:

• Research & Teaching (R&T)

• Research-Only (Research)

• Learning, Teaching and Scholarship (Teaching)

32

challenging for progression. The new criteria incorporate a wider range of skills and experience, taking a

more qualitative approach to assessment, which we anticipate will particularly facilitate female staff

progression.

Table 4.13 AHSSBL Research & Teaching Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014-15

AHSSBL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Female Male Female Male Female Male

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

R&T

GRADE 6 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 60% 2 40%

GRADE 7 32 45% 39 55% 35 49% 37 51% 37 54% 32 46%

GRADE 8 53 51% 51 49% 57 52% 52 48% 59 50% 59 50%

GRADE 9 57 47% 65 53% 58 48% 63 52% 67 50% 67 50%

READER 12 40% 18 60% 13 35% 24 65% 11 28% 29 73%

PROF 43 25% 127 75% 51 28% 131 72% 60 32% 129 68%

TOTAL 199 40% 300 60% 214 41% 307 59% 237 43% 318 57%

There is a reasonable gender balance at G6-9, with a notable drop in females at Reader and Professor (Table

4.13). This reflects the AHSSBL pipeline and related actions (s.4.1(i)).

Table 4.14 AHSSBL Research Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014-15

AHSSBL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Research

GRADE 6 16 67% 8 33% 19 61% 12 39% 19 54% 16 46%

GRADE 7 28 55% 23 45% 31 58% 22 42% 33 57% 25 43%

GRADE 8 12 60% 8 40% 12 60% 8 40% 11 58% 8 42%

GRADE 9 2 67% 1 33% 2 67% 1 33% 3 75% 1 25%

PROF 1 14% 6 86% 1 14% 6 86% 1 13% 7 88%

TOTAL 59 56% 46 44% 65 57% 49 43% 67 54% 57 46%

There are low numbers of AHSSBL Research staff. Women are overrepresented at every level except

Professor.G6-7 male proportions have increased from 33% to 46%. Reflecting recognition of teaching,

new promotion criteria will preclude promotion to Professor on the Research track. To help with this

transition, we will ensure G8-9 Research staff (mainly female) are informed of, and supported to meet,

new criteria for routes to Professorship open to them (Action 3.2.2).

33

Table 4.15 AHSSBL Teaching Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014-15

AHSSBL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Teaching

GRADE 6 25 54% 21 46% 38 67% 19 33% 28 60% 19 40%

GRADE 7 25 64% 14 36% 31 63% 18 37% 37 60% 25 40%

GRADE 8 57 61% 37 39% 68 65% 37 35% 61 66% 31 34%

GRADE 9 10 91% 1 9% 10 83% 2 17% 10 67% 5 33%

PROF 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100%

TOTAL 117 61% 74 39% 147 66% 77 34% 136 62% 82 38%

Noticeably, there are no female Teaching Professors;1 female Professor was recently promoted outwith the

period. There are also small numbers of male Professors, reflecting the challenging nature of the previous

Teaching-track criteria.

The step-change in our academic culture and pathways described above bodes well for the advancement of

AHSSBL Teaching staff. There’s a good proportion of G9 women, suggesting potential for improved gender

balance amongst Professors. Men are underrepresented across G6-9, although the proportion of men at G7-

9 has improved.

All Teaching staff will be supported towards meeting the new criteria through P&DR discussions, workshops

and transferring eligible Teaching staff onto ECDP (Actions 3.2.2).

34

STEMM:

Table 4.16 UofG STEMM Staff by Contract Function and Gender w/National Comparator

STEMM

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 NATIONAL

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

Research &Teaching 27% 73% 27% 73% 28% 72% 35% 65%

Research 49% 51% 49% 51% 47% 53% 45% 55%

Teaching 60% 40% 57% 43% 55% 45% 48% 52%

Figure 1.15 UofG STEMM Staff by Contract Function and Gender w/National Comparator

Women are underrepresented in STEMM R&T. There are proportionately fewer women in these positions

than the national average and progress has been slow.

Research staff proportions are more balanced with a near gender balance across this function and better

female representation at the University compared with the national average. .

Men are slightly underrepresented in Teaching positions, however, the proportion of males improved during

the reporting period.

27% 27% 28%35%

49% 49% 47% 45%

60% 57% 55%48%

73% 73% 72%65%

51% 51% 53% 55%

40% 43% 45%

52%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

NA

TIO

NA

L

Research & Teaching Research Teaching

STEMM Academic Staff by Contract Function and Gender

2012/13 -2014/15 FEMALE

MALE

35

Table 4.17 STEMM Research &Teaching Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014-15

STEMM

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

R&T

GRADE 6 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 4 67% 2 33%

GRADE 7 16 38% 26 62% 14 42% 19 58% 20 44% 25 56%

GRADE 8 39 33% 79 67% 34 31% 77 69% 40 33% 81 67%

GRADE 9 45 30% 105 70% 49 32% 104 68% 39 27% 107 73%

READER 18 30% 43 70% 19 28% 48 72% 21 32% 45 68%

PROF 38 19% 164 81% 37 18% 167 82% 41 19% 174 81%

TOTAL 157 27% 419 73% 153 27% 415 73% 165 28% 434 72%

STEMM R&T pipeline shows a gradual but sustained drop in female representation. This reflects the overall

STEMM pipeline and related actions are discussed above (s. 4.1(i)).

Table 4.18 STEMM Research Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014-15

STEMM

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Research

GRADE 6 156 63% 91 37% 165 55% 133 45% 143 51% 136 49%

GRADE 7 182 46% 217 54% 221 48% 243 52% 233 49% 245 51%

GRADE 8 49 43% 65 57% 53 45% 65 55% 50 40% 74 60%

GRADE 9 7 23% 24 77% 8 24% 25 76% 8 24% 25 76%

PROF 3 23% 10 77% 3 23% 10 77% 2 18% 9 82%

TOTAL 397 49% 407 51% 450 49% 476 51% 436 47% 489 53%

Women comprised nearly half of STEMM Researchers for the period. It’s clear from Table 4.16 women

become underrepresented at G8, reflecting the difficult transition from Postdoctoral Researcher to

Lecturer/Independent Researcher.

The Research Strategy and Innovation Office (RSIO) and Employee and Organisational Development (EOD)

provide high quality opportunities supporting the personal, professional and career development of

researchers, which is supplemented by local activity. This support will be discussed more fully below in

Section 5.2(i) and (iii) and our actions complement the vast range of initiatives already in place.

Table 4.19 STEMM Teaching Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014-15

STEMM

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Teaching

GRADE 6 8 73% 3 27% 9 64% 5 36% 5 36% 9 64%

GRADE 7 35 78% 10 22% 41 80% 10 20% 46 75% 15 25%

GRADE 8 20 51% 19 49% 28 53% 25 47% 31 55% 25 45%

GRADE 9 17 52% 16 48% 17 38% 28 62% 24 44% 31 56%

PROF 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 5 100%

TOTAL 80 60% 53 40% 95 57% 73 43% 106 55% 85 45%

STEMM Teaching roles have become more gender balanced over the period although women still comprise

the majority of G7-8 Teaching staff.

36

There is better gender balance at G9 in STEMM than in AHSSBL, however, we see a similar pattern with no

female Teaching Professors in STEMM. Like AHSSBL, there is a good pool of female Teaching staff for

progression to G8-Professor. As discussed, improved promotion criteria and a developed ECDP will support

the pipeline. Actions to ensure the fairness of recruitment processes should alleviate any potential barriers

for male early-career Teaching staff.

Clinical Academic Functions

Most Clinical Academic staff perform R&T roles. A small number of Clinical Senior/University Teachers

provide clinical teaching and a minority of staff (other than RFs) conduct clinical research.

The gender distribution across Research and Teaching roles is reasonably balanced (Tables 4.21-22).

Despite good female representation at Clinical Lecturer and Senior Lecturer, there is a serious

underrepresentation of female Clinical Professors (Table 4.20). Our completed and implemented actions

address these concerns. (Action 3.2.4).

Table 4.20 Clinical Research & Teaching Staff by Role, and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

CLINICAL ACADEMIC 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


R&T

RESEARCH FELLOW 1 33% 2 67% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50%

UNIVERSITY TEACHER 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

SNR UNIVERSITY TEACHER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

LECTURER 14 40% 21 60% 13 42% 18 58% 13 48% 14 52%

SNR LECTURER/RF 11 39% 17 61% 11 46% 14 54% 11 50% 12 50%

READER 1 11% 8 89% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 5 100%

PROFESSOR 11 20% 43 80% 12 23% 40 77% 13 22% 46 78%

TOTAL 38 29% 91 71% 38 32% 82 68% 38 33% 78 67%

Table 4.21 Clinical Research Staff by Role, and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15



Research

RESEARCH FELLOW 29 48% 32 52% 39 57% 30 43% 32 56% 25 44%



LECTURER 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0%

SNR LECTURER/RF 3 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 2 50% 2 50%

READER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

PROFESSOR 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100%

TOTAL 32 48% 34 52% 44 58% 32 42% 36 56% 28 44%

37

Table 4.22 Clinical Teaching Staff by Role, and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15



Teaching

RESEARCH FELLOW 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%



LECTURER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

SNR LECTURER/RF 0 0% 1 100% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50%

READER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

PROFESSOR 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 3 100%

TOTAL 10 45% 12 55% 13 48% 14 52% 14 52% 13 48%

The new Academic Clinician pathway outlined above will align with promotion criteria for other roles. This in

particular will enable greater flexibility in recognising varying academic and clinical workloads. Its intention is

to remove potential barriers to promotion to Senior Lecturer and Professor (Action 3.2.4).

(iv) Academic leavers by grade and gender

Comment on the reasons academic staff leave the institution. Comment on and explain any differences

between men and women, and any differences in schools or departments.

Tables 4.23-4 show few AHSSBL and STEMM voluntary leavers amongst permanent male/female staff. There

are no clear gender trends at G8 and above with low numbers at G9, Reader and Professor.

Table 4.23 Leavers by Contract Type, Grade and Gender – AHSSBL Disciplines 2012/13 -2014/15

AHSSBL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


Fixed-Term

GRADE 6 7 58% 5 42% 19 68% 9 32% 34 81% 8 19%

GRADE 7 7 54% 6 46% 3 27% 8 73% 12 75% 4 25%

GRADE 8 5 56% 4 44% 10 63% 6 38% 10 63% 6 38%

GRADE 9 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

READER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

PROF 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100%

TOTAL 19 56% 15 44% 32 56% 25 44% 56 75% 19 25%

Permanent

GRADE 6 2 40% 3 60% 3 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50%

GRADE 7 1 25% 3 75% 2 50% 2 50% 3 75% 1 25%

GRADE 8 0 0% 2 100% 2 67% 1 33% 4 80% 1 20%

GRADE 9 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 2 100% 1 100% 0 0%

READER 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100%

PROF 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 3 100%

TOTAL 7 35% 13 65% 7 47% 8 53% 9 56% 7 44%

38

Table 4.24 Leavers by Contract Type, Grade and Gender – STEMM Disciplines 2012/13 -2014/15

STEMM

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


Fixed-Term

GRADE 6 26 47% 29 53% 32 50% 32 50% 44 51% 43 49%

GRADE 7 16 30% 37 70% 24 44% 31 56% 37 51% 36 49%

GRADE 8 4 67% 2 33% 3 30% 7 70% 4 50% 4 50%

GRADE 9 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100%

READER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

PROF 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0%

TOTAL 46 40% 69 60% 59 45% 72 55% 85 50% 84 50%

Permanent

GRADE 6 1 50% 1 50% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0%

GRADE 7 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33%

GRADE 8 2 29% 5 71% 0 0% 4 100% 7 47% 8 53%

GRADE 9 2 40% 3 60% 2 33% 4 67% 1 25% 3 75%

READER 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0%

PROF 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 3 100% 2 40% 3 60%

TOTAL 7 35% 13 65% 3 18% 14 82% 12 44% 15 56%

Few permanent Clinical academic staff left the University (Table 4.25). Although all permanent leavers were male

over the 3 years, these appear to have been retirements.

Table 4.25 Leavers by Contract Type, Grade and Gender – Clinical Academics 2012/13 -2014/15

CLINICAL

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


Fixed-Term

RESEARCH FELLOW 1 20% 4 80% 6 40% 9 60% 7 54% 6 46%


LECTURER 0 0% 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 2 100%

TOTAL 1 17% 5 83% 8 42% 11 58% 7 47% 8 53%

Permanent

SENIOR UNIVERSITY TEACHER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100%

SENIOR LECTURER 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0%

READER 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100%

PROFESSOR 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0%

TOTAL 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100%

New exit surveys were launched in March 2015 for voluntary leavers and those who left following the end of

their post. Tables 4.26-7 demonstrate approximately 60% (22/37), of STEMM leavers resigned to take up a

new role with 40% (13/33) remaining in academia. Proportionately more male STEMM leavers moved to the

private sector than their female counterparts, who were more likely to assume roles in public sector.

Similarly, most AHSSBL leavers take up new positions in academia. The survey response rate is extremely

low. We will improve completion rates to help evaluate the reasons staff choose to leave the University

(Action 4.1.3).

39

Table 4.26 Voluntary Leavers’ Reasons for Leaving by Gender and AHSSBL/STEMM Discipline

Leavers - Reasons

AHSSBL STEMM

Female Male Female Male

New job/role 4 (80%) 1 (20%) 10 (45%) 12 (55%)

Change of career 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)

Retirement 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)

Relocation 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)

Other personal reasons 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Returning to full time education/study 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Other 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Total 6 (75%) 2 (25%) 18 (49%) 19 (51%)

Table 4.27 Voluntary Leavers’ Reasons for Leaving by Gender and AHSSBL/STEMM Discipline

(v) Equal pay audits/reviews

Comment on the findings from the most recent equal pay audit and identify the institution’s top three

priorities to address any disparities and enable equality in pay.

The University’s substantive pay scale across academic staff G6-9 does not demonstrate any statistically

significant differences within grades defined by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) (±5%)

(Fig.1.16).

Figure 1.16 Pay Gap by Grade based on data from August 2015

-1.26%

-0.65%

0.49%

0.13%

-1.50% -1.00% -0.50% 0.00% 0.50% 1.00%

GRADE 6

GRADE 7

GRADE 8

GRADE 9

Gender Pay Gap by Grade 2015

Gender Pay Gap in favour of

Females

Gender Pay Gap in favour of

Males

Leavers - Destination

AHSSBL STEMM

Female Male Female Male

Higher Education 4 (75%) 1 (25%) 6 (46%) 7 (54%)

Private Sector 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (43%) 8 (57%)

Public Sector 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)

Other 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Total 4 (75%) 1 (25%) 16 (48%) 17 (52%)

40

Our most recent pay review shows an overall academic pay gap of -13.31%. The pay gap is calculated using

overall average female full-time equivalent basic salary divided by overall average male full-time equivalent

basic salary, where a minus figure denotes a gap favouring males.

Equalised pay analysis shows it is largely caused by occupational segregation, with women underrepresented

in senior roles, particularly at Professor (see Fig. 1.1 above).

Professorial zoning was introduced to place Professors into one of 4 zones (4 being the highest) influenced

by academic portfolio and performance (over 4-6 year period) against several criteria. If necessary, salaries

are adjusted to match zones.

This process has been successful in tackling potentially unequal pay, bringing Professorial pay within

statistically permitted parameters of 3-5% defined by EHRC for zones 1, 3 and 4 (Fig.1.17). However, we are

not complacent and through the annual zoning process and actions outlined below, will continue to tackle

the gap within each zone.

41

Actions 2.2.1(i)-(iii))

Action 3.2.5

Action 3.2.6

Action 3.2.7.

• Increase the proportion of women in senior roles (Professorial)

via a diversification of applicants to Professorial posts

• Use Professorial zoning. Including zoning upon promotion to

Professor so candidates who waited too long to apply are

appointed to correct zone; not simply ‘zoned’ at level 1 which

particularly benefits women

• Review starting salaries for Professorial positions to identify any

discrepancy at hiring stage. Implement plan to address this,

where found.

• Gender Pay Working Group to investigate the reasons for the

larger gap in this zone

42

5. SUPPORTING AND ADVANCING WOMEN’S CAREERS


5.1. Key career transition points: academic staff

i. Recruitment

Break down data by gender and grade for applications, long- and shortlisted candidates, offer and

acceptance rates. Comment on how recruitment processes ensure that women (and men in

underrepresented disciplines) are encouraged to apply.

Action taken since original Athena SWAN Award:

• Equality and Diversity Statements in job adverts strengthened and details of Athena SWAN

work included signalling commitment to gender equality;

• Recruitment and Selection Policy revised with mandatory requirement for at least one

member of each sex on appointment panels;

• Mandatory Recruitment and Selection training for all members of appointing panels, an

essential precursor for which is successful completion of online Equality and Diversity

Training;

• Recruitment and Selection training enhanced. Now comprises half-day session delivered in-

house with unconscious bias overview incorporated.

The University aims to recruit the best people regardless of background. Applicants are assessed

against Essential and Desirable criteria. HR ensure recruitment panels apply best practice around panel

composition, shortlisting and interview arrangements. It recently transpired University-level

recruitment data does not consistently outline where offers were accepted or not for the period.

‘Appointments’, therefore, refers to those who were offered posts.

This is unacceptable and we will take action to address it (Action 2.1.3).

Action 2.1.3 We will improve our collection and reporting of recruitment data to enhance our

understanding of acceptance rates for posts

43

Table 5.1 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) AHSSBL Grade 6 academic posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

AHSSBL – GRADE 6 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 286 175 385 260 325 278

Distribution of Applications 62% 38% 60% 40% 54% 46%

SHORTLIST9 52 38 66 46 65 56

Distribution of Shortlist 58% 42% 59% 41% 54% 46%

APPOINMENTS 29 21 38 22 45 20

Distribution of Appointments 58% 42% 63% 37% 69% 31%

Shortlist Success Rate 18% 22% 17% 18% 20% 20% Appointment Success Rate 56% 55% 58% 48% 69% 36%

Men are underrepresented at each recruitment stage for AHSSBL G6. While men have similar success rates

at shortlisting, they tend to be less successful at interview. We will take action on this through training and

ensuring fair protocols.

(Action 2.1.1)

(Action 2.1.2)

Introduce mandatory Unconscious Bias (UB) for all members of recruitment and

promotion panels.

Audit appointment panel composition to check at least one person of each sex

represented.

Table 5.2 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) STEMM Grade 6 academic posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

STEMM – GRADE 6 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 672 623 558 695 586 646


SHORTLIST 127 98 106 148 115 144


APPOINMENTS 49 35 41 61 51 64



Gender is more balanced for STEMM G6 applications, compared to AHSSBL. Success rates at shortlisting and

appointment are similar for both; reflecting gradual improvement in gender balance at G6 in

STEMM(Fig.1.3).

9 We do not long-list. The Shortlist here refers to those invited for interview.

44


AHSSBL – GRADE 7 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 476 617 392 467 384 465


SHORTLIST 77 78 73 71 83 76


APPOINMENTS 27 22 39 27 46 41



Men comprise the majority of AHSSBL G7applications. The shortlist shows reasonably even representation,

with appointments variable but more gender balanced by 2014/15. Appointment success rates varied but

demonstrate women are more likely to be shortlisted and appointed. Unconscious bias training will help

address potential bias against males at these early career positions.


STEMM – GRADE 7 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 540 1074 486 987 616 1003


SHORTLIST 136 194 149 213 173 213


APPOINMENTS 72 76 67 92 77 81



Data show a small increase in female G7 STEMM applicants, from 33%-38%. Women enjoyed higher

interview and appointment success rates. There is good gender balance in appointments made over the

whole period, indicating no obvious bias in shortlisting and appointment of early career STEMM females.

45


AHSSBL – GRADE 8 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 145 165 54 86 186 307


SHORTLIST 44 37 6 13 13 19


APPOINMENTS 17 11 6 8 1 8




STEMM – GRADE 8 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 162 852 75 104 84 397


SHORTLIST 21 90 19 18 20 48





Women were underrepresented at all recruitment stages for G8 AHSSBL/STEMM roles, save at shortlisting

and appointment in 2013/14.

Data above (Fig.1.3) G8 to be a key drop-off point. We will take action to attract women at this significant

mid-career stage (Actions 2.1.1; 2.2(i)-(iii)).

2.2.1 (i)

2.2.1 (ii)

2.2.1 (iii)

2.2.3

Review recruitment material wording to ensure it does not alienate potential female applicants.

Prepare virtual pamphlet outlining University’s family-friendly policies, networks and schemes

for recruitment campaigns and packs.

Embed equality and diversity duties and responsibilities in job descriptions for positions at

Professorial level and above.

Profile successful female clinical academics to encourage applications from women for Clinical

Lecturer posts, when they become available.

46


AHSSBL – GRADE 910

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 131 212 56 124 72 119


SHORTLIST 27 29 11 8 15 15






STEMM – GRADE 9 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 61 286 21 78 90 474


SHORTLIST 12 25 6 15 13 63





Men constituted the majority of G9 AHSSBL/STEMM applications. Despite this, STEMM women were equally

or more successful at shortlisting and appointment and at shortlisting in AHSSBL.

AHSSBL female appointments rose from 38% in 2012/13 to 45% in 2014/15 and between 2012/13 and

2013/14 in STEMM.

Eight G9 vacancies advertised in 2014/15 were for positions in School of Engineering, accounting for the

sharp rise in overall applications (65 female;398 male). The School are awaiting the outcome of their AS

submission and have local actions to address female underrepresentation in recruitment.

Our recruitment actions above will help to address this at a University level (Actions 2.1.1; 2.2(i)-(iii)).

10

G9 and READER posts tend to be advertised as G9/Reader roles in the R&T job family and so are collected in the

system and presented here as G9 positions.

47

Table 5.9 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) AHSSBL Professor posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

AHSSBL – PROFESSOR 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 41 161 12 51 22 26


SHORTLIST 16 37 5 14 5 7





Table 5.10 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) STEMM Professor posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

STEMM – PROFESSOR 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 20 84 1 7 10 35


SHORTLIST 5 24 1 5 2 18





The majority of applicants for AHSSBL Professor were male; although female applicants rose in 2014/15.

Women enjoyed either higher or relatively similar success rates at shortlisting and appointment stage across

the period.

Women were underrepresented for STEMM Professor Applications. However, proportionately, women were

very successful at securing interviews and offers for posts.

Women are underrepresented in the AHSSBL/STEMM pipeline (Figs.1.2-3). Head-hunters used for these

senior vacancies are directed to return diverse shortlist. Our recruitment actions will help attract more

female applicants (Actions 2.2(i)-(iii)).

48

Table 5.11 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) Clinical University Teacher posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

CLINICAL

UNIVERSITY TEACHER

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


APPLICATIONS 11 3 3 0 - -

Distribution of Applications 79% 21% 100% 0% - -

SHORTLIST 6 1 2 - - -

Distribution of Shortlist 86% 14% 100% - - -

APPOINMENTS 3 1 1 - - -

Distribution of Appointments 75% 25% 100% - - -

Shortlist Success Rate 55% 33% 67% - - - Appointment Success Rate 50% 100% 50% - - -

Data show low recruitment for Clinical University Teachers; when men do apply they enjoyed 100% success

rate at interview.

Table 5.12 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) Clinical Lecturer posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

CLINICAL LECTURER 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15




SHORTLIST 4 5 6 6 7 11





Table 5.13 Applications, Shortlist and Appointments (Offers) Clinical Senior Lecturer posts 2012/13 – 2013/14

CLINICAL SENIOR

LECTURER

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15




SHORTLIST 1 4 1 0 1 -

Distribution of Shortlist 20% 80% 100% 0% 100% -

APPOINMENTS 1 4 1 - 1 -

Distribution of Appointments 20% 80% 100% - 100% -

Shortlist Success Rate 100% 50% 50% - 50% -

Appointment Success Rate 100% 100% 100% - 100% -

Clinical Lecturers are akin to Postdoctoral Researcher with a 20% of time based in academia and 80% in

clinical training.

Fewer women applied for Clinical Lecturer posts across the period (Table 5.12). There is no clear gender

trend in shortlisting and appointment success rates. Encouragingly, women were highly successful at Clinical

Senior Lecturer level (Table 5.13).

Heavy clinical duties coupled with demands of academia and the need to secure funding to advance to

Senior Lecturer Level (similar to PI) were identified as aspects potentially putting clinicians off pursuing an

49

academic path as part of a focus group carried out with female Clinical Academics in 2014 as part of original

action plan (see s.4.1(i))

We must encourage female Clinical RFs to pursue a clinical academic pathway after completion of their PhD

(Actions 2.2 – 3).

Action2.2.1 (i)

Action 2.2.1 (ii)

Action 2.2.1 (iii)

Action 2.2.3

Review recruitment material wording to ensure it does not alienate potential female

applicants.

Prepare virtual pamphlet outlining University’s family-friendly policies, networks and

schemes for recruitment campaigns and packs.

Embed equality and diversity duties and responsibilities in job descriptions for positions at

Professorial level and above.

Profile successful female clinical academics to encourage applications from women for

Clinical Lecturer posts, when they become available.

50

ii. Induction

Describe the induction and support provided to new all staff at all levels. Comment on the uptake of this and

how its effectiveness is reviewed.

Managers work through an Induction Checklist with all new staff. Content includes an introduction to

policies and mandatory training including, Equality & Diversity; and Researcher Integrity and Recruitment &

Selection.

The University runs induction stallholder

events. Historically there were two large

events. Poor attendance suggested these

were not effective. We are trialling smaller

quarterly events. Attendees have a

presentation from the Head of EOD and meet

staff from a range of services who host stalls

at the event. The Equality and Diversity Unit

and staff networks take part.

The University hosts Welcome Events for new staff and their families with children’s entertainment. These

are well attended and enable new staff to socialise with colleagues at a family-friendly event.

The staff survey 2014 highlighted differences on the success of this, particularly for female academic staff

and male clinical academic staff:

Q4-2 If you have joined the University in the last 12 months, did you receive an induction to your new role?

Induction processes have been strengthened at School/RI levels as part of AS activity; especially where there

is a high concentration of clinical academics. Activities have included new induction events, revised staff

handbooks and induction material tailored to local areas, and greater use of Induction Buddies. We expect

that the next staff survey, due to launch at the start of May 2016, will demonstrate the impact of this.

Induction Checklist Topics

• Pre-arrival (incl. identification of an appropriate

Induction Buddy)

• Introductions/General Arrangements

• Health & Safety

• Role

• Local Operations & Procedures

• New Employee Induction Guide

• University Information

• Mandatory Training (incl. Recruitment & Selection;

Equality & Diversity; and Researcher Integrity)

63 56 5

c c t ff c c c t ff f t t ff

51

iii. Promotion

Provide data on staff applying for promotion and comment on applications and success rates by

gender, grade and full- and part-time status. Comment on any evidence of a gender pay gap in

promotions at any grade.

Actions since original Bronze award:

• Introduction of mechanisms for taking account of career breaks and part-time working in

promotion process

• Promotion Policy strengthened regarding gender representation on panels

• Reader criteria produced to improve transparency

• Promotion workshops introduced at College/School/RI level as part of either Athena SWAN and

Organisational Development plans

• Women-focused promotion workshops trialled in College of Social Sciences

Promotion is an annual, standardised, University-wide process. Promotion discussions take place with

applicants identified during Performance and Development Review (P&DR). Applicants can self-

nominate.

Applications are determined by a multi-disciplinary panel and assessed against 5 criteria:

• Research & Scholarship;

• Knowledge Exchange and Impact;

• Teaching and Learning;

• Leadership and Management (incl. Outreach, Widening Participation, Pastoral and Student

Welfare activity); and

• Esteem

All staff are emailed the timeline, applications and links to relevant information, available on the

University website, at the launch of each round.

Upon promotion, salaries are matched with the first point on a grade’s salary-scale, unless exceptional

circumstances apply, e.g. an applicant is deemed to have waited too long to apply. Analysis of the last

promotion round shows no evidence of a significant gender gap

52

Table 5.14. Successful Applicants Appointed at Higher Spinal Point than Norm by Grade and Gender 2014/15

GRADE FEMALES AWARDED HIGHER

SPINAL POINT/ZONE

MALES AWARDED HIGHER

SPINAL POINT/ZONE

GRADE 7 0/1 1/2

GRADE 8 0/3 1/4

GRADE 9 2/7 1/8

READER 0/0 0/1

PROF 0/6 0/2

TOTAL 2/17 3/17

The Promotion policy now enables panels to account for the impact of career breaks, part-time working

and other forms of leave.

Consultation (especially Key Career Transition Points and Career Development Session) revealed a

prevailing perception that it is harder for part-time staff to achieve promotion. Promotions data do not

support this although do show low applications from part-time staff. We will take action to address this

(Action 3.2.1).

We revised promotion criteria across all tracks, as outlined above (s.4.1(iii)). To explain the new criteria,

we will run a University-wide Demystifying Promotion Conference. (Action 3.2.2).

3.2.1

3.2.2

Profile staff working less than full-time who have achieved promotion via case studies.

Hold Demystifying Promotion Conference ahead of launch of new criteria (October 2016). Sessions

to cover:

• Applying for promotion with confidence;

• encouraging women not to wait too long to apply accounting for maternity and part-time

working;

• Promotion for Researchers

• Applying to Grade 9.

53

Table 5.15 (i): Apps and Promotions to Grade 7 by AHSSBL, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

AHSSBL GRADE 7

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME


PROMOTIONS 1 0 2 1 1 0

SUCCESS RATE 100% 0% 67% 33% 100% -

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 0% 100% 100% - - 100%

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 50% 50% 75% 33% 100% 100%

ELIGIBLE 43 29 57 31 50 37

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 5% 7% 7% 10% 2% 5%

Table 5.15 (ii): Apps and Promotions to Grade 7 by STEMM, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

STEMM GRADE 7

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 58% 80% 80% 100%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% - - - 100% 100%

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 58% 80% 82% 100%

ELIGIBLE 165 96 174 138 152 147

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 5% 4% 7% 4% 11% 5%

The data show:

• AHSSBL women equally or more successful than men across the period but fewer female

applicants as proportion of eligible pool;

• STEMM women less successful than men in 2013/14 and 2014/15; more female than male

applicants as proportion of eligible pool;

• High success rate for AHSSBL/STEMM applications from part-time staff, only 1 unsuccessful

applicant during the period.

G6 staff tend to be early career researchers. The 2015 CROS survey showed only 43% female and 39%

male respondents felt they’d equal prospects for promotion compared to other staff.

Promotion actions are included in our HR Excellence in Research Action Plan, successfully renewed last

year. We will include sessions at the Conference to address this (Action 3.2.2).

54

Action 3.2.2 Research-specific sessions will be included in the Demystifying Promotion

Conference to raise awareness of the new criteria and its impact evaluated in

the next CROS survey

Table 5.16(i): Apps and Promotions to Grade 8 by AHSSBL, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

AHSSBL GRADE 8

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 89% 75% 88% 78% 67% 100%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - 100% 100% - -

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 89% 75% 91% 80% 67% 100%

ELIGIBLE 69 67 70 66 50 73

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 13% 6% 24% 15% 12% 5%

Table 5.16(ii): Apps and Promotions to Grade 8 by STEMM, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

STEMM GRADE 8

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME


PROMOTIONS 4 12 10 12 5 15

SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 100% 86% 83% 83%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - 100% - 100% -

TOTAL


PROMOTIONS 4 12 12 12 6 15

SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 100% 86% 86% 83%

ELIGIBLE 233 253 276 272 299 285

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 2% 5% 4% 5% 2% 6%

The data show:

• More female than male AHSSBL applicants as proportion of eligible pool with higher female

success rates in 2012/13 and 2013/14. Given small numbers and changes, this does not suggest

reason to be overly concerned;

• STEMM females equally or more successful than men but slightly fewer applications from

females as proportion of eligible pool;

• 100% success for AHSSBL/STEMM part-time applicants but with very low numbers applying.

(See (Actions 3.2.1 3.2.2).

55

Table 5.17 (i): Apps and Promotions to Grade 9 by AHSSBL, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

AHSSBL GRADE 9

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 77% 60% 42% 53%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% - 100% - 100% -

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 50% 80% 29% 40% 29% 27%

ELIGIBLE 122 96 137 97 131 98

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 7% 5% 10% 10% 11% 15%

Table 5.17 (ii): Apps and Promotions to Grade 9 by STEMM, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

STEMM GRADE 9

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% 89% 50% 85% 25% 80%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - 50% 100% 50% -

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 100% 89% 50% 86% 33% 73%

ELIGIBLE 108 163 115 167 121 180

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 7% 11% 3% 8% 5% 6%

The data show:

• AHSSBL females submitted more applications but were less successful across the whole period;

• STEMM females less successful in 2013/14 and 2014/15;

• Proportions of both STEMM/AHSSBL female applicants generally lower as a percentage of the

eligible population compared to men.

We will ensure women are supported to apply for promotion and increase applications across all tracks

to G9 (Action 3.2.2).

56

Table 5.18 (i): Apps and Promotions to Reader by AHSSBL, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

AHSSBL READER

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% - 80% 0% 100%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - - - - -

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% - 80% 0% 100%

ELIGIBLE 191 85 83 90 91 102

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 1% 1% 0% 6% 2% 1%

Table 5.18 (ii): Apps and Promotions to Reader by STEMM, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

STEMM READER

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 100% 60% 75% 60%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - - - - -

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 100% 100% 100% 60% 75% 60%

ELIGIBLE 176 308 189 324 192 343

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3%

The data show:

• AHSSBL in Women less successful than men in 2014/15

• STEMM women more successful than men across the period in 2013/14.

• Fewer applications from both AHSSBL/STEMM females across the period as proportion of the

eligible pool

The University further developed Reader criteria, previously considered opaque and confusing by staff,

last year. It is hoped that this will help staff map skills and experience onto the criteria and continue to

increase the number of females applying. We will take action to analyse the impact of this (Action

3.2.8).

Action 3.2.8 Analyse promotion applications and outcomes at Reader over the next

4 years to evaluate success of new criteria.

57

Table 5.19 (i): Apps and Promotions to Professor by AHSSBL, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

AHSSBL PROFESSOR

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 57% 50% 100% 57% 67% 22%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - 100% - - -

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 57% 50% 100% 57% 67% 22%

ELIGIBLE 81 85 83 90 91 102

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 9% 5% 5% 8% 10% 9%

Table 5.19 (ii): Apps and Promotions to Professor by STEMM, Gender and Full/Part-time Status

STEMM PROFESSOR

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


FULL-TIME



SUCCESS RATE 80% 43% 80% 64% 67% 58%

PART-TIME



SUCCESS RATE - - 0% - 100% 0%

TOTAL



SUCCESS RATE 80% 43% 67% 64% 75% 50%

ELIGIBLE 81 85 83 90 91 102

APPS as % ELIGIBLE 6% 8% 7% 16% 4% 14%

The data show:

• Fewer AHSSBL and STEMM female than male applications over the period but higher success

rates for both AHSSBL/STEMM women across all years.

Following our original award, promotion workshops were held across all AHSSBL/STEMM Colleges.

Templates of how to evidence progression were produced to enhance the usefulness of these

workshops.

Targeted female-only workshops were run at College-level in SS. We will open the workshops to men

who may experience similar confidence and parental issues identified in the consultation (Action

3.2.3).

Action 3.2.3

Promotion workshops (previously targeted at women) in AHSSBL

disciplines to be open to all staff.

58

iv. Staff submitted to the Research Excellence Framework (REF) by gender (224 words)

Provide data on staff, by gender, submitted to REF versus those that were eligible. Compare this to the

data for the Research Assessment Exercise 2008. Comment on any gender imbalances identified.

Table 5.20 RAE 2008 Submission by Gender and STEMM/AHSSBL Marker and Institution

Table 5.21 REF 2014 Submission by Gender and STEMM/AHSSBL Marker and Institution

REF 2014 Female Male Total

No. %* %^ No. %* %^ No. %* %^

STEMM

Submitted 174 77% 26% 497 87% 74% 671 84% 100%

Not submitted 51 23% 40% 77 13% 60% 128 16% 100%

Total eligible for submission 225 100% 28% 574 100% 72% 799 100% 100%

AHSSBL

Submitted 189 79% 40% 285 84% 60% 474 82% 100%

Not submitted 49 21% 48% 53 16% 52% 102 18% 100%


University

Submitted 363 78% 32% 782 86% 68% 1145 83% 100%

Not submitted 100 22% 43% 130 14% 57% 230 17% 100%


%* compare vertically within gender

%^ compare horizontally across total population

RAE 2008 Female Male Total

No. %* %^ No. %* %^ No. %* %^

STEMM

Submitted 166 66% 23% 552 81% 77% 718 77% 100%

Not submitted 86 34% 39% 132 19% 61% 218 23% 100%


AHSSBL

Submitted 200 75% 39% 312 84% 61% 512 81% 100%

Not submitted 65 25% 53% 58 16% 47% 123 19% 100%


University

Submitted 366 71% 30% 864 82% 70% 1230 78% 100%

Not submitted 151 29% 44% 190 18% 56% 341 22% 100%


59

Figure 1.18. Percentage of Eligible Staff submitted to REF2014 by Gender

Figure 1.19. Percentage of Staff Submitted to REF2014 by Gender

84%

87%

77%

82%

84%

79%

83%

86%

78%

72% 74% 76% 78% 80% 82% 84% 86% 88%

Total

Male

Female

Percentage of Eligible Staff Submitted to REF 2014 within

University, AHSSBL and STEMM disciplines

University AHSSBL STEMM

68%

60%

74%

32%

40%

26%

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

University

AHSSBL

STEMM

Staff Submitted to REF 2014 within Univerisity, AHSSBL and

STEMM Disciplines by Gender

Female

Male

60

Analysis of the data above show:

• Across all markers female proportions of eligible staff pool was lower than proportions of

submitted staff that were female in REF2014 and RAE2008. However, differences extremely low

in REF2014 and an improvement on RAE2008.

• Proportion (within gender) of all eligible male/ female staff submitted in REF2014 was

≥proportions submitted in RAE2008.

• Statistically significant difference between selection rates for male and female staff; female staff

less likely to be selected for REF.

Further examination showed women declaring maternity leave as a circumstance had comparable

selection rates (81%) to total male population (86%), whereas the selection rate for women without

any period(s) of maternity leave within REF period was significantly lower. This suggests fixed tariff

reduction for maternity leave within the REF period was effective at redressing the balance between

the genders. However, pre-REF period maternity leave and ongoing childcare commitments may have

contributed to eligible female staff not being selected.

Reviews were held across Schools/RIs following REF and a number of actions at local levels introduced

including improved research mentoring; targeted discussions with Research Convenors/Discussions;

and enhanced development discussions encouraged at P&DR.

A number of University actions, implemented and planned, will support staff with factors that may have

contributed to issues identified above as well as workload allocation issues which have been raised as

potentially disproportionately affecting women (s.5.4(viii)):

Implemented

Action 4.3.2

Action 5.4

Academic Returners Research Support Scheme introduced to fund up to £10k to help

maternity/adoption/shared parental returners resume research upon return. (5.3 (iii))

Use new workload model to ensure female staff not overburdened with administrative

roles which impede research capacity.

Pilot Conference Carer Fund to contribute to cost of caring commitments to facilitate

attendance at conferences.

61

5.2. Career development: academic staff

i. Training

Describe the training available to staff at all levels. Provide details of uptake by gender and how existing

staff are kept up to date with training. How is its effectiveness monitored and developed in response to

levels of uptake and evaluation?

EOD co-ordinates and delivers a wide-range of training opportunities for staff at all levels. EOD meets

quarterly to review evaluation from the previous three months and agree any changes to courses or

programmes that may be required.

Courses include academic leadership programmes and those covering all aspects of an academic career

Table 5.22: Uptake on Leadership and other EOD courses by gender 2012/13-2014/15

Programme 2012/13

(%Female)

2013/14

(%Female)

2014/15

(%Female)

New Principal Investigators Programme (NPIP) N/A 43% 39%

Academic Leadership Programme (ALP) N/A 33%

29%

Senior Research Leaders Programme (SRLP)

N/A N/A 42%

All other courses 52%

(455/879)

51% (716/1408) 53% (711/1342)

Table 19: Training courses for researcher development

Table 5.22 shows a good representation of women ≥50% on all training courses. Women participating

on NPIP and SRLP decreased over the two years. We must ensure the process for recruiting to them

encourages female participation (Action 3.1.2).

Table 5.22(i) EOD Course Provision

• Building Effective Research Collaborations

• Building Relationships with Business

• Career Planning

• Four Steps to Research Success Programme

• Impact Statements in Grant Applications

• Job Interview Techniques

• Job Seeking Strategies Knowledge

Exchange, Public Engagement and Impact

• Making Presentations at Conferences

• Managing Successful Research Projects

• More Steps to Research Success Programme

• Presenting on Camera: Improving Your Personal

Impact

• Publishing Papers in Refereed Journals

• Research Integrity

• Speaking Up Effectively at Meetings for

Researchers

• Understanding Supervision

• Winning Research Income (Grant Applications)

Action 3.1.2 Improve female participation (at least 45%) in new Leadership programmes

62

ii. Appraisal/development review

Describe current appraisal/development review for academic staff at all levels across the whole

institution. Provide details of any appraisal/development review training offered and the uptake of this,

as well as staff feedback about the process.

We operate a compulsory annual Performance and Development Review (P&DR) process for all staff,

including those on fixed-term contracts but not for Clinical Academics staff who participate in NHS

appraisal.

P&DR gives staff the opportunity to discuss progress, achievements and longer-term objectives. Criteria

mirror promotion criteria for academic staff and include specific requirement to record discussions

about promotion.

Table 5.23, Academic Staff responses by gender to P&DR questions in Staff Survey 2014

Question Academic Staff in Agreement

Q4-3 Have you had an individual P&DR in the last 12

months?

Q4-4 Was your P&DR useful for you?

Q4-5 Did you agree clear objectives as part of your P&DR

meeting?

Q4-6 Did your P&DR leave you feeling your work is

valued by the University?

Staff Survey 2014 results (Table 5.23) show issues with academic staff’s (both male/female) experience

of the usefulness of P&DR and sense of their work being valued. Following consultation, revisions to

P&DR (launching May 2016) include clearer outcomes (reduction from 5 to 4 possible outcomes);

simplifying the process and consideration of performance across the role and not solely on the

achievement of objectives. This should enhance staff’s sense of value for work done more broadly

(Action 3.2.10).

85% 80%

56% 60%

94% 94%

41% 42%

63

The P&DR process prompts reviewers to take account of personal circumstances, including periods of

absence or reduced hours related to a characteristic protected under the Equality Act 2010.

Following course evaluation, face-to-face P&DR training was replaced with an online resource to reach

more staff; 613 accessed the resource in 2014/1511

. This is supplemented by local training and guidance

(Action 3.2.9).

11

http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/humanresources/employeeandorganisationaldevelopment/learningcoursesandresourc

es/performancedevelopmentreview/#/introductiontoperformancedevelopmentreview,pdr:settingobjectives

64

iii. Support given to academic staff for career progression

Comment and reflect on support given to academic staff including postdoctoral researchers to assist in

their career progression.

Actions since original Bronze Award:

• LFHE Aurora Programme: 28 women (18 academic; 10 professional and support) sponsored

between 2014/15-2015/16;

• Introduction of ECDP- holistic career development programme providing structured support for

career progression to Grade 9;

• Women in Research Network established by female STEMM academics and resourced with

University funds;

• Postdoctoral Researcher Forum established.

• Women’s Mentoring Scheme run in AHSSBL since 2013/14;

• AS Mentoring Scheme piloted in STEMM 2014-2016;

• Researcher Mentoring Scheme piloted across all disciplines 2014-2016;

Mentoring:

Central schemes (see box above) are supplemented by local initiatives. In recognition of the value of

mentoring, the annual Mentor of the Year Award was introduced in 2015. Mentoring is recognised in

promotion, P&DR and the new WLM.

Departmental SAT surveys and the Postdoctoral Researcher Forum highlighted confusion around

mentoring within the University. EOD in conjunction with the Researcher Development Manager and

Heads of HR are reviewing mentoring provision; learning from best practice across the sector,

particularly from researcher development colleagues who specialise in mentoring at University of

Sheffield. The central mentoring schemes will be consolidated (Action 3.1.1).

Networking:

The Women in Research Network was established in 2015 by female STEMM academics, supported

with University funding. It has been highly successful in providing informal networking opportunities for

both male and female academic staff. WIRN hosted 3 lunchtime events in its first year, with >85

attendees at each session. A WIRN development workshop facilitated by an external consultant will

take place in June 2016.

To facilitate external networking at conferences for staff with caring responsibilities, we are piloting a

Conference Carer Fund, discussed more fully, below (s.5.3).

65

Postdoctoral and ECRs- specific:

Actions since original Bronze Award

• Glasgow Crucible Programme: Leadership and Development for ECRs (incl. postdoctoral staff);

• Fellowship Application Mentoring Scheme;

• Interdisciplinary Researchers Network;

• Innovation Platform- workshops, networking and funding for postdoctoral entrepreneurial and

research commercialisation activity;

• New Initiatives Fund: supporting personal, professional and career development of ECRs.

Workshops and courses are mapped against the Vitae Researcher Development Framework reflecting

the University’s commitment to the Concordat for Career Development of Researchers.

The latest Careers in Research Online Survey showed that 57% of respondents (63% Males; 68%

Females) had undertaken 3 or more days of CPD in the past year (compared with 49% in 2013 and 49%

for the Russell Group Universities average). From 2015, our target is that all researchers will undertake

at least 5 days a year (Action 3.1.3).

66

5.3. Flexible working and managing career breaks

Note: Present professional and support staff and academic staff data separately

i. Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: before leave

Explain what support the institution offers to staff before they go on maternity and adoption leave.

Maternity/Adoption Policies are available online for all staff. We advise pregnant employees to notify

their line manager as early as possible so that appropriate support can be put in place. Guidance Notes

for Managers cover support during pregnancy, maternity leave and return to work. The First Line

Managers course covers a range of (leave) policies and processes, including maternity leave.

The Staff Survey 2014 demonstrated varying levels of agreement across job families and gender

regarding treatment during maternity/pregnancy:

Table 5.24 Staff Survey 2014 Data on Equal Treatment for Maternity/Pregnancy by Staff Type and Gender

Q. 12-4e (I agree) The University respects people equally regardless of their maternity/pregnancy:


• Maternity Pay Calculator created- helps expectant mothers to gauge potential pay/benefits on

different schemes;

• Maternity Leave flowchart and employee/manager checklist created to signpost advice, guidance

and support Before/During/After Leave;

• Maternity Policy reorganised to flag important steps at each stage of leave and new FAQs

developed based on intelligence gathered from local HR Teams;

• Parental Buddy Network for staff to get peer-support before/during/after leave.

• Academic Returners and Research Support Scheme introduced- providing up to £10k funding to

help resume research upon return.

• Pilot Conference Carer Fund launched to help with additional childcare/dependent/eldercare costs

when attending conferences.

• Flexible Working Case Studies and Flexible Working Top Tips/FAQs produced.

8 8 5

c c c c c f t

67

A survey of recently returned maternity/paternity/adoption leavers by the Deputy HR Director in

September 2014 highlighted lack of clarity around calculating pay/benefits on different maternity leave

schemes. A Maternity Pay Calculator was created in 2014/15 to address this.

Local SAT staff surveys conducted between 2013-15 showed low awareness of the maternity policy,

with actions devised to highlight these policies on School/RI webpages and in local Induction packs.

Feedback at Parents and Carers Workshops with both academic and P&S staff highlighted variable line

manager support and that not all staff feel well-informed. Participants wrote on comment cards that

they had received ‘Clear guidance and support from HR’ but that ‘More education for line managers on

leave policy and return’ should be considered a future action and that ‘Having maternity mentor or

buddy would help’, (November 2015).

We have:

• Made Maternity Guidance more user-friendly, adding a Checklist

• established a Parental Buddy Network.

• incorporated in Full Stop campaign (s.5.4(xiv)).

Action 4.1.1

Action 4.1.4

Action 4.1.3

Action 4.1.5

Action 4.1.6

Line managers automatically sent Maternity Checklist when employee makes

maternity leave request

Review use of Parental Buddy Network

Refresh our Adoption and Shared Parental Leave policies following maternity

model over the next year

Hold a Parental Leave Roadshow in June 2016 to promote the new guidance,

support and network

Prepare short videos of parents discussing their experience of maternity and

shared parental leave to allow all staff to benefit from their experience and

insights

68

ii. Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: during leave

Explain what support the department offers to staff during maternity and adoption leave.

The University provides enhanced maternity and adoption pay; funding for cover is available at

College-level.

Parents and Carers Workshops and local SAT activity revealed that:

• staff felt responsible for arranging cover for teaching when on leave;

• poor awareness and uptake of KIT days;

• PIs were unaware of existing internal mechanisms to request maternity cover for research staff

where a project funder fails to provide support.

We have devised actions in light of this:

Action 4.1.2

Action 4.1.7

Update Maternity Checklist to clarify that managers, in consultation with the expectant

parent, are responsible for ensuring appropriate arrangements are made; already

updated to raise awareness and prompt staff to plan KIT days

Develop specific guidance, by funder, on maternity leave provision, working, initially,

with SATs and College HR Teams.

iii. Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: returning to work

Explain what support the department offers to staff on return from maternity or adoption leave.

Comment on any funding provided to support returning staff.

After identifying a significant gap in support, during consultation for our original award, we introduced

an Academic Returners Research Support Scheme, to help staff returning from a period of

maternity/adoption/shared parental leave to resume research upon return.

Staff can apply for up to £10k to help fund, amongst other things, teaching cover, research assistance or

materials. Since its launch in January 2015, the Scheme has supported 20 applicants with £165,500

funding from the scheme.

The maternity leave policy is clear that all staff wishing to continue breastfeeding upon return to work

will be accommodated with a clean and private space to express milk. Schools/RIs are working to

identify suitable breastfeeding rooms as part of their local AS action plans (Action 4.1.8).

At various consultation workshops, parents spoke candidly about difficulties and emotional pressures of

returning to work. The opportunity to discuss these issues clearly benefitted them and this, combined

with specific feedback, prompted our creation of a new Parental Buddy Network. (Action 4.1.4).

69

Action 4.1.8

Action 4.1.4

Compile list of local breastfeeding room facilities.

Review new Parent Buddies initiative after 6 months to check buddies are not being

overburdened and evaluate after one year.

iv. Maternity return rate

Provide data and comment on the maternity return rate in the institution. Data and commentary on

staff whose contracts are not renewed while on maternity leave should be included in this section.

Table 5.25. Maternity Leave taken and Maternity Return Rate of Academic Staff from 2012/13 – 2014/15

*8 members of staff still currently on leave and indicated will return in 2016.

Academic

Maternity

Starts Returned

Contract End/

Non-Renewal Resigned

Return

Rate

2012/13 30 25 1 4 83% 2013/14 49 39 4 6 80%

2014/15 50 48* 2 0 96%

Table 5.26. Maternity Leave taken and Maternity Return Rate of Clinical Staff from 2012/13 – 2014/15

*5 members of staff still currently on leave and indicated will return in 2016.

Clinical

Academic

Maternity

Starts Returned

Contract End/


Return

Rate

2012/13 7 5 1 1 71%

2013/14 11 8 2 1 73%

2014/15 19 18* 1 0 95%

Table 5.27. Maternity Leave taken and Maternity Return Rate of Professional and Support Staff from 2012/13

– 2014/15 *8 members of staff still currently on leave and indicated will return in 2016.

Professional

& Support

Maternity

Starts Returned

Contract End/


Return

Rate

2012/13 57 46 1 10 81%

2013/14 61 49 4 8 80%

2014/15 50 47* 2 1 94%

Data show return rates of roughly 80% for academic (Table 5.25) and P&S (Table 5.27). We forecast a

higher return rate for 2014/15 as 21 women currently on leave have indicated their return. Clinical

academic staff had lower return rates, although numbers are comparatively smaller.

18 women’s contracts were not renewed whilst on leave: the majority were fixed-term contracts

covering other staff on leave.

We implemented a new HR/Payroll system in 2012. The previous system had not recorded

maternity/paternity/adoption leave and return arrangements. Through our actions on increasing peer-

support and improving the resumption of research on return (s.5.3(iii)), in addition to improving

understanding and confidence around flexible working arrangements (s.5.3(vi)), we hope that staff will

feel better supported to return to work.

70

v. Paternity, shared parental, adoption, and parental leave uptake

Provide data and comment on the uptake of these types of leave by gender and grade for the whole

institution. Provide details on the institution’s paternity package and arrangements.

We offer 2 weeks Paternity Leave with 1 week paid at full salary and the second week paid at statutory

paternity pay.

We had no instances of Shared Parental Leave during the reporting period. Two employees are

currently sharing parental leave (1 Female clinical academic and 1 Male STEMM academic). They have

benefitted from flexible SPL arrangements and support. We will highlight this as a parental case study in

line with our actions above (Action 4.1.6).

Table 5.28 Paternity leave taken by Academic staff 2012/13 – 2014/15

Table 5.29 Paternity leave taken by Clinical Academic staff 2012/13 – 2014/15

Table 5.30 Paternity leave taken by Professional and Support staff by grade 2012/13 – 2014/15

Paternity leave was taken by academic and P&S staff across a broad range of grades over the period.

There are no apparent trends in the uptake of paternity leave, although it is higher for academic staff at

G6-8. Uptake amongst clinical academics was low although not unexpected given lower numbers of

clinical academic workforce at the University.

Academic 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

GRADE 6 4 5 6

GRADE 7 6 9 8

GRADE 8 10 16 8

GRADE 9 2 4 4

READER 1 0 2

PROF 3 5 1

TOTAL 26 39 29

Clinical Academic 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 RES. FELLOW 1 1 2

LECTURER 2 3 0

SENIOR LECTURER 1 2 1

PROFESSOR 0 0 0

TOTAL 4 6 3

Professional & Support

(all Male)

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

GRADE 1 2 3 1

GRADE 2 1 2 6

GRADE 3 1 4 0

GRADE 4 1 4 2

GRADE 5 1 4 4

GRADE 6 2 6 3

GRADE 7 3 6 4

GRADE 8 3 9 4

GRADE 9 0 1 1

TOTAL 14 39 25

71

Adoption Leave was taken by 3 female members of staff:

• 2 female academic staff (G6 and G9) and;

• 1 female member of P&S staff (G6).

Table 5.31 Parental Leave taken by Academic staff by grade and gender 2012/13 -2014/15

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Academic FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE

GRADE 6 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

GRADE 7 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)

GRADE 8 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

GRADE 9 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

READER 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

PROF 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

TOTAL 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)

Table 5.32 Parental Leave taken by Professional and Support staff by grade and gender 2012/13 -2014/15

Professional

& Support

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


GRADE 1 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

GRADE 2 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

GRADE 3 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

GRADE 4 4 (100%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 8 (89%)

GRADE 5 3 (100%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)

GRADE 6 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)

GRADE 7 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)

GRADE 8 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

GRADE 9 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

TOTAL 7 (88%) 1 (12%) 5 (56%) 4 (44%) 5 (24%) 16 (76%)

Use of Parental Leave was extremely low during the reporting period for all staff, particularly

academic (Table 5.31) and clinical academic (2 Female Senior Clinical Lecturers in 2013/14). It was

higher amongst P&S staff, but this is reflective of the higher number of staff in these roles at the

University (Table 2.1). The data show that women are more likely to take parental leave except

amongst P&S staff, where 21/38 instances of parental leave was taken by male staff across the

period.

72

vi. Flexible working

Provide information on the flexible working arrangements available.

In line with common practice, staff are able to apply to work on a flexible basis including part-time,

compressed hours, work from home, term-time working, staggered hours and job-share.

Table 33. Flexible Work Requests of Academic Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


Grade 6

Apps 0 0 3 (100%) 0 2 (67%) 1 (33%)

Successful Apps - - 3 (100%) - 2 (67%) 1 (33%)

Success Rate - - 100% - 100% 100%

Grade 7

Apps 2 (100%) 0 9 (100%) 0 7 (78%) 2 (22%)

Successful Apps 2 (100%) - 9 (100%) - 6 (86%) 1 (14%)

Success Rate 100% - 100% - 86% 50%

Grade 8

Apps 2 (100%) 0 0 1 (100%) 5 (63%) 3 (37%)

Successful Apps 2 (100%) - - 1 (100%) 5 (63%) 3 (37%)

Success Rate 100% - - 100% 100% 100%

Grade 9

Apps 0 2 (100%) 0 0 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Successful Apps - 2 (100%) - - 1 (100%) 0 (0%)

Success Rate - 100% - - 100% 0%

READER

Apps 0 0 0 0 0 1 (100%)

Successful Apps - - - - - 1 (100%)

Success Rate - - - - - 100%

PROF

Apps 0 1 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)

Successful Apps - 0 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)

Success Rate - (0%) 100% 100% 100% 100%

TOTAL

Apps 4 (57%) 3 (43%) 13 (87%) 2 (13%) 17 (63%) 10 (37%)

Successful Apps 4 (67%) 2 (33%) 13 (87%) 2 (13%) 16 (67%) 8 (33%)

Success Rate 100% 67% 100% 100% 94% 76%

Table 34. Flexible Work Requests of Academic Staff by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


Clinical University Teacher

Apps 0 0 0 0 1 (67%) 0

Successful Apps - - - - 0 (0%) -

Success Rate - - - - 0% -

Clinical Lecturer

Apps 0 0 0 0 2 (100%) 0



73

Table 35. Flexible Work Requests of Professional and Support by Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15


Grades 1-3

Apps 0 0 0 0 2 (67%) 1 (33%)

Successful Apps - - - - 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Success Rate - - - - 50% 100%

Grade 4

Apps 0 0 5 (100%) 0 4 (80%) 1 (20%)

Successful Apps - - 4 (100%) - 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Success Rate - - 80% - 25% 100%

Grade 5

Apps 2 (100%) 0 3 (100%) 0 4 (57%) 3 (43%)

Successful Apps 1 (100%) - 3 (100%) - 2 (67%) 1 (33%)

Success Rate 50% - 100% - 50% 100%

Grade 6

Apps 3 (100%) 0 1 (100%) 0 5 (71%) 2 (29%)

Successful Apps 3 (100%) - 1 (100%) - 4 (67%) 2 (33%)

Success Rate 100% - 1 (100%) - 80% 100%

Grade 7

Apps 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%) 3 (50%) 3 (50%)

Successful Apps 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 3 (50%) 3 (50%)

Success Rate 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100%

Grade 8

Apps 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 4 (57%) 3 (43%)

Successful Apps 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

Success Rate 100% 100% 100% 100% 25% 33%

Grade 9

Apps 1 (100%) 1 (17%) 0 0 0 1 (100%)

Successful Apps 0 (0%) 1 (17%) - - - 1 (100%)

Success Rate 0% 100% - - - 1 (100%)

Grade 10

Apps 0 0 0 0 1 (100%) 0



TOTAL

Apps 8 (73%) 3 (27%) 14 (88%) 2 (12%) 23 (62%) 14 (38%)

Successful Apps 6 (67%) 3 (33%) 12 (86%) 2 (14%) 13 (57%) 10 (43%)

Success Rate 75% 100% 86% 100% 57% 71%

Tables 5.33-5 show that staff submitting flexible working requests are generally successful. The number of

requests rose in 2014/15. This coincided with legislative changes entitling all staff to apply and increased

awareness of flexible working from Departmental SAT activity.

During the AS consultation we learned that P&S staff felt less likely to be allowed to work flexibly. This is not

borne out in the data (Table 5.35). To address this we had staff share Flexible Working Case Studies,

published alongside the Flexible Working Policy showing a variety of job families and working patterns. We

also developed a Top Tips/FAQs and will promote it to staff (Action 4.2.1).

74

Action 4.2.1

Raise awareness about Flexible Working:

• Add new Flexible Working Case Studies.

• Publish Top Tips/ FAQs for Flexible Working online alongside the policy and Case

Studies

vii. Transition from part-time back to full-time work after career breaks

Outline what policy and practice exists to support and enable staff who work part-time to transition

back to full-time roles when childcare/dependent or caring responsibilities reduce.

All academic and P&S staff who work part-time can make a flexible working request to increase their

hours back to 1FTE. The University currently hosts and sponsors 3 Daphne Jackson Trust (DJT) Fellows

and has pledged to support at least 1 fellow every 3 years (reflecting recent changes by DJT to length of

Fellowships).

Academic staff benefit from support of mentors during their return to full-time work. All staff can

access relevant training; e.g. Balancing a Busy Workload and Speaking Up and Putting your Point Across

with Confidence. We will build on DJT best practice and other models to prepare guidance on

supporting staff returning to full-time work (Action 4.2.2).

Action 4.2.1

Prepare guidance on support transition to full-time work following part-time working

or career break using DJT

viii. Childcare

Describe the institution’s childcare provision and how the support available is communicated to staff.

Comment on uptake and how any shortfalls in provision will be addressed.

There are >70 nurseries within 2 miles of the University campus. We offer childcare vouchers on a

salary-sacrifice scheme, currently used by 604 staff.

We host a nursery on-site run by an external provider, offering 74 places for under 5’s, and open

weekdays from 8am-6pm. Priority is given to staff and students and, due to the building being provided

to the University by the council free of charge, subsidies are available.

The issue of childcare arose at all the consultation workshops, showing participants considered nursery

provision inadequate. Following our original award, a feasibility study rejected expanding the nursery

due to limited space and Health & Safety risks. However, the University is planning a substantial

(£1billion) campus redevelopment and have included a new on-site childcare space via both a nursery

and crèche (Action 4.2.3).

Action 4.2.3

Enhance nursery and crèche provision as part of Campus Development Project

75

ix. Caring responsibilities

Describe the policies and practice in place to support staff with caring responsibilities and how the

support available is proactively communicated to all staff.

We are piloting a Conference Carer Fund to make a financial contribution towards additional childcare

and caring costs for academic staff attending conferences. We will review (Action4.2.4).

Through the pilot we hope to identify staff with responsibilities as carers and invite them to join the

‘Parental Buddy Network’, which will expand to become a ‘Parents and Carers Buddy Network’;

providing peer-support to staff with caring responsibilities (Action 4.2.5).

The University’s free Employee Assistance Programme provides telephone and face-to-face counselling,

information and specialist advice, including advice on putting power-of-attorney and other

arrangements in place for eldercare. Usage and awareness of the service is low. We will raise

awareness about the EAP (Action 4.2.6).

Action 4.2.4

Action 4.2.5

Action 4.2.6

Review the pilot outcomes and determine if it is meeting the need of academic staff

with caring responsibilities for official rollout

Identify and invite carers to act as ‘buddies’

Raise awareness of the EAP, targeting carers

76

5.4. Organisation and culture

i. Culture

Demonstrate how the institution actively considers gender equality and inclusivity. Provide details of how the

charter principles have been, and will continue to be, embedded into the culture and workings of the

institution and how good practice is identified and shared across the institution.

Recent (2015) actions embedding the Charter Principles include:

• Introduction of EWP, replacing zero-hours contracts;

• Attainment of Living Wage employer status;

• Aligning provision for University-funded PhD scholarships around maternity and other leave with RCUK

provisions, to remove a potential barrier in the progression from PhD to a sustainable academic career.

Gender equality, along with other strands, is part of the University’s Equality Governance (s.2(i)) and attracts

commitment and action from senior leaders. AS support is provided across the University by a Gender

Equality Officer; and in MVLS a Gender Equality Committee, supported by an AS Data Officer (s.5.4.xxiv).

In the 2014 staff survey, 91% of respondents agreed the University treats staff equally regardless of gender.

This differed by job family, with females, particularly R&T, less in agreement:

Table 5.36. Staff Survey 2014 data re: equal treatment regardless of gender by Staff Type and Gender

We have sought to address potential issues creating this gender difference via our Athena SWAN activities.

To analyse our next Staff Survey (May 2016), we will use a new tool to disaggregate data in-house allowing

an intersectional analysis to further explore similar female R&T responses to the equivalent question (Action

5.1.4).

91 8 3

c c c c c f t

77

ii. HR policies

Describe how the institution monitors the consistency in application of its HR policies for equality, dignity at

work, bullying, harassment, grievance and disciplinary processes. Describe actions taken to address any

identified differences between policy and practice. Include a description of the steps taken to ensure staff

with management responsibilities are up to date with their HR knowledge.

Our biannual staff survey and annual staff diversity report allow us to monitor the operation of HR policies.

EDSC and Equality Champions (VPs) take action to address disparity. Policy updates are communicated to all

staff, including managers, via weekly e-newsletters and monthly HR updates. We also run targeted

communications campaigns: e.g. to promote mandatory Equality and Diversity Training and our Dignity at

Work and Study Policy.

In January 2016 EDSC asked SMG to make online Equality and Diversity training mandatory for all staff in

order to push us forward to achieving a target for≥90% completion by April 2017 (Action 5.2.1).

Our last staff survey showed:

• 4% of staff reported bullying and harassment (with no significant gender differences in responses)

• 70% were unaware of Dignity at Work and Study policy.

• Poor awareness of Harassment Volunteers Network (HVN), which offers confidential guidance for staff

and students.

In response EDSC commissioned Full Stop, a multimedia anti-bullying and harassment campaign. Staff and

students co-created 26 ‘micro-fictions’ covering: racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, stalking,

exclusion, victimisation, sectarianism, ridicule and deliberate overloading with work. The Principal launched

the campaign in October 2015, with a new e-story and poster released each week over 6 months.

After 4 months, analysis and a pulse survey with 650 respondents indicated:

• 41% increase in awareness of the Dignity policy;

• 55% would now know where to go for help;

• 71% felt Full Stop was an effective campaign;

• campaign webpage had 3088 views with a further 4076 views on main Full Stop news pages.

78

Example Micro-fictions from Full Stop Campaign 2015/16

79

iii. Proportion of heads of school/faculty/department by gender

Comment on the main concerns and achievements across the whole institution and any differences

between STEMM and AHSSBL departments.

Actions since Original Bronze Award:

• Female academics encouraged to consider HoS/DRI roles via profiling of senior females/HoS/DRI

roles in internal communications;

• Open recruitment used for HoS/DRI roles;

• Cohort of female academics with leadership potential identified and encouraged to apply for LFHE

Aurora Programme (University has sponsored 16 women to attend over last two rounds);

• Academic leadership programme for (potential) senior leaders in Colleges (HoS, DRIs, Deans)

designed and implemented (2013/14).

Table 5.37. Heads of College by Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

AHSSBL STEMM TOTAL UNIVERSITY


2012/13 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 2 50% 2 50%

2013/14 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 2 50% 2 50%

2014/15* 1 50% 1 50% 2 100% 0 0% 3 75% 1 25%

Table 5.38 Heads of School/Directors of Research Institutes by Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

AHSSBL STEMM TOTAL UNIVERSITY


2012/13 3 33% 6 67% 3 18% 14 82% 6 23% 20 77%

2013/14 2 22% 7 78% 3 18% 14 82% 5 19% 21 81%

2014/15 2 22% 7 78% 2 12% 15 88% 4 15% 22 75%

We have a good representation of female leaders as Heads of College over the reporting period (Table 5.37).

Heads of School (HoS) and Directors of Research Institute (DRIs) are appointed by Court on recommendation

of the Principal and Head of College. Roles are advertised with a defined job description and person

specification.

Women are extremely underrepresented. In 2015/16 the proportion of female AHSSBL HoS will improve

when one female will take over from a male HoS on agreement to share the post.

In STEMM it reflects the low proportion of female Professors (19%) (Fig.1.3). In 2014/15, an increased

imbalance occurred when one female HoS was succeeded by a male.

Our long-term goal to increase female leaders will take committed workforce planning and time to yield

impact. Actions taken since our original award have begun to address this through leadership development:

80

• 16 potential academic female leaders identified and sponsored on LFHE Aurora Programme over last 2

years.

• Academic Leadership Programme (ALP) designed for newly-appointed HoS/DRIs, and those who may

take up such a role in the very near future. Female representation was 33% in 2013/14 and 29% in

2014/15.

ALP will be expanded to include potential leaders from P&S and rebranded as a University Leadership

Programme. We are also developing Emerging Leaders and Aspiring Leaders Programmes to harness and

nurture leadership potential at an earlier career stage.

These programmes will be important for identifying and supporting women likely to become HoS/DRI (e.g.

G9 academic women).We will ensure women are identified to take part in this programme (at least

45%)(Action 3.1.2).

81

iv. Representation of men and women on senior management committees

Provide data by gender, staff type and grade and comment on what the institution is doing to address any

gender imbalance.

Table 5.39: Senior Management Group Membership by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

R&T PROF 22% 2 78% 7 11% 1 89% 8 18% 2 82% 9

CLIN PROF 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

MPA 10 0% 0 100% 3 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2

23% 3 77% 10 17% 2 83% 10 21% 3 79% 11

2012-13 2013-14SMG

Full

membership

2014-15

F M F M F M

Table 5.40 University Services (Senior) Leadership Team by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

10 60% 6 40% 4 60% 6 40% 4 60% 6 40% 4

55% 6 45% 5 55% 6 45% 5 55% 6 45% 5

USLT 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

MPA

Full

membership

The SMG, comprising a small group of senior academic and professional services staff, is currently 21%

female (Table 5.39). CMGs and the University Services Leadership Team (USLT) provide strategic direction

for each area. Female representation ranges from 17% to 64%, reflecting gender ratios at higher grades

(Tables 5.41-44). In S&E CMG, although percentages are low, there has been an increase from 6% to 17%

females.

Table 5.41: Social Science College Management Group by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

9 100% 1 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0

PROF 40% 4 60% 6 33% 3 67% 6 50% 4 50% 4

45% 5 55% 6 45% 5 55% 6 60% 6 40% 4

9 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

10 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0

75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 25% 1

53% 8 47% 7 53% 8 47% 7 64% 9 36% 5

Soc Sci CMG

Total R&T

MPA

Total MPA

Full

membership

R&T

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

82

Table 5.42: College of Arts College Management Group by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

9 - - - - 50% 1 50% 1 50% 2 50% 2

PROF 40% 4 60% 6 22% 2 78% 7 43% 3 57% 4

40% 4 60% 6 27% 3 73% 8 45% 5 55% 6

8 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

9 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0

10 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

80% 4 20% 1 80% 4 20% 1 80% 4 20% 1

53% 8 47% 7 44% 7 56% 9 56% 9 44% 7

Full

membership

MPA

Total R&T

Total MPA

ARTS CMG

R&T

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

Table 5.43: MVLS College Management Group by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 - - - -

PROF 36% 4 64% 7 12% 1 88% 7 0% 0 100% 11

33% 4 67% 8 11% 1 89% 8 0% 0 100% 11

CLIN PROF 75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 25% 1 100% 4 0% 0

75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 25% 1 100% 4 0% 0

9 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

10 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1

47% 9 53% 10 37% 6 63% 10 33% 6 67% 12

MVLS CMG

Total R&T

MPA

Total MPA

Full

membership

Total CLINICAL

R&T

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

Table 5.44: Science and Engineering College Management Group by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

R&T PROF 7% 1 93% 13 8% 1 92% 12 14% 2 86% 12

7% 1 93% 13 8% 1 92% 12 14% 2 86% 12

9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 50% 1 50% 1

10 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2

0% 0 100% 3 0% 0 100% 3 25% 1 75% 3

6% 1 94% 16 6% 1 94% 15 17% 3 83% 15

S&E CMG

Total R&T

MPA

Total MPA

Full

membership

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

CMG and USLT membership is role-specific. SMG roles are non-rotating and, therefore, membership is

relatively static. With the exception of the Clerk of Senate, SMG positions are appointed via the University’s

standard recruitment procedures. Our action on recruitment is therefore relevant here (Actions 2.2.1(i)-

(iii)).

83

v. Representation of men and women on influential institution committees

Provide data by committee, gender, staff type and grade and comment on how committee members are

identified, whether any consideration is given to gender equality in the selection of representatives and what

the institution is doing to address any gender imbalances.

Action taken since original Athena SWAN Award:

• Court commitment to 40:40:20 gender approach for the lay membership of Court and, where

appropriate, its sub-committees (minimum of 40% men and 40% women on their boards, with the

remaining 20% of places open to both genders). Achieved for all Court Committees, with exception

of Finance.

• 2015 open recruitment for new lay members of Court; appointed two new female members.

• Elizabeth Passey co-founder 30% Club appointed Court Convenor- signalling benefits of positive

female leadership.

Table 5.45 Court (Governing Body) by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

9 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 3

PROF 40% 2 60% 3 40% 2 60% 3 40% 2 60% 3

29% 2 71% 5 29% 2 71% 5 25% 2 75% 6

CLIN PROF 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 N/a 0 N/a 0

100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 N/a 0 N/a 0

6 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

9 - - - - - - - - 0% 0 100% 1

10 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 - - - -

100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 50% 1 50% 1

50% 5 50% 5 50% 5 50% 5 30% 3 70% 7

7% 1 93% 14 20% 3 80% 12 40% 6 60% 9

24% 6 76% 19 32% 8 68% 17 36% 9 64% 16

Full

membership

Total Staff

Court

LAY/SRC

Total R&T

Total CLINICAL

Total MPA

MPA

R&T

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

84

Table 5.46 Council of Senate by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2013/14 – 2014/15

Cat Grade

7 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

8 67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1

9 42% 11 58% 15 41% 11 59% 16

PROF 17% 12 83% 57 19% 13 81% 54

26% 26 74% 73 28% 27 72% 71

CLIN PROF 63% 5 38% 3 50% 5 50% 5

63% 5 38% 3 50% 5 50% 5

8 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

10 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

29% 32 71% 77 30% 33 70% 77

58% 7 42% 5 58% 7 42% 5

32% 39 68% 82 33% 40 67% 82

Council of Senate

Total R&T

Total CLINICAL

MPA

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

R&T

2013-14 2014-15

F M F M

Senate, whose membership amounted to over 500 (26% female to 74% male 2012-13) was replaced by

Council of Senate in 2013/14. Tables 5.45-6 demonstrate female representation on Court (Governing Body)

and Council of Senate (Senior Academic Body) committees. Both have seen increases in female

membership, although minimally in Council of Senate.

85

Main Senate Sub-Committees

Table 5.47 Senate Assessor Composition by Staff Type, Grade and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

9 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 3

PROF 50% 2 50% 2 50% 2 50% 2 50% 2 50% 2

CLIN PROF 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 - - - -

43% 3 57% 4 43% 3 57% 4 29% 2 71% 5

Sen

ate

Ass

ess

ors

R&T

Full

membership

Cat Grade

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

Table 5.48 EdPSC Composition by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

9 50% 2 50% 2 50% 3 50% 3 40% 2 60% 3

PROF 33% 3 67% 6 22% 2 78% 7 22% 2 78% 7

38% 5 62% 8 33% 5 67% 10 29% 4 71% 10

CLIN PROF 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0

100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0

7 - - - - 100% 1 0% 0 - - - -

8 100% 1 0% 0 - - - - 100% 1 0% 0

9 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

10 60% 3 40% 2 67% 4 33% 2 57% 4 43% 3

50% 4 50% 4 63% 5 38% 3 56% 5 44% 4

48% 11 52% 12 48% 12 52% 13 44% 11 56% 14

0% 0 100% 2 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

44% 11 56% 14 48% 13 52% 14 44% 12 56% 15

Ed

uca

tio

n P

olicy

an

d S

trate

gy C

om

mit

tee

R&T

Total R&T

Total CLINICAL

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

MPA

Cat Grade

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

Table 5.49 L&TC Composition by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

8 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 33% 1 67% 2

9 44% 4 56% 5 45% 5 55% 6 44% 4 56% 5

PROF 40% 2 60% 3 25% 1 75% 3 17% 1 83% 5

38% 6 63% 10 35% 6 65% 11 33% 6 67% 12

CLIN PROF 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

8 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

10 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1

43% 9 57% 12 40% 9 60% 13 9 14

75% 3 25% 1 60% 3 40% 2 60% 3 40% 2

48% 12 52% 13 44% 12 56% 15 50% 12 50% 16

Learn

ing &

Teach

ing C

om

mit

tee

Total R&T

Total CLINICAL

MPA

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

R&T

Cat Grade

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

86

Table 5.50 RPSC Composition by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

6 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 - - - -

7 - - - - - - - - 50% 1 50% 1

8 - - - - - - - - 100% 1 0% 0

PROF 54% 7 46% 6 40% 6 60% 9 21% 3 79% 11

57% 8 43% 6 44% 7 56% 9 29% 5 71% 12

CLIN PROF 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

8 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

9 100% 1 0% 0 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

10 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

100% 3 0% 0 75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 25% 1

67% 12 33% 6 52% 11 48% 10 41% 9 59% 13

0% 0 100% 2 50% 1 50% 1 100% 1 0% 0

60% 12 40% 8 52% 12 48% 11 43% 10 57% 13

Rese

arc

h P

lan

nin

g a

nd

Str

ate

gy C

om

mit

tee

R&T

Total R&T

Total CLINICAL

MPA

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

Cat Grade

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

Main Court Sub-Committees

Table 5.51 HR Committee Composition by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

9 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

PROF 50% 2 50% 2 40% 2 60% 3 17% 1 83% 5

33% 2 67% 4 33% 2 67% 4 14% 1 86% 6

9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 - - - -

10 50% 2 50% 2 75% 3 25% 1 60% 3 40% 2

40% 2 60% 3 60% 3 40% 2 60% 3 40% 2

36% 4 63% 7 45% 5 55% 6 33% 4 67% 8

0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 3 67% 2 33% 1

31% 4 69% 9 36% 5 64% 9 40% 6 60% 9

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F MCat Grade

HR

Co

mm

itte

e

R&T

Total R&T

MPA

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

87

Table 5.52 EDSC Composition by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

9 - - - - 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

PROF 14% 1 86% 6 17% 1 83% 5 17% 1 83% 5

14% 1 86% 6 29% 2 71% 5 29% 2 71% 5

6 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

7 - - - - 100% 1 0% 0 - - - -

8 100% 1 0% 0 - - - - 100% 1 0% 0

9 0% 0 100% 1 - - - - - - - -

10 33% 1 67% 2 75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 25% 1

50% 3 50% 3 83% 5 17% 1 83% 5 17% 1

31% 4 69% 9 54% 7 46% 6 54% 7 46% 6

50% 1 50% 1 100% 2 0% 0 50% 1 50% 1

33% 5 67% 10 60% 9 40% 6 53% 8 47% 7

R&T

Total R&T

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

MPA

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15


Eq

uality

& D

ivers

ity S

trate

gy C

om

mit

tee

Table 5.53 Renumeration Committee by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

R&T PROF 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

MPA 10 0% 0 100% 2 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

0% 0 100% 2 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

0% 0 100% 3 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1 67% 2

0% 0 100% 3 0% 0 100% 4 0% 0 100% 4

0% 0 100% 6 14% 1 86% 6 14% 1 86% 6

Full

membership

Total R&T

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15


Ren

um

era

tio

n

Table 5.54 Finance Committee by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

9 - - - - - - - - 0% 0 100% 2

PROF 33% 1 67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 0% 0 100% 1

33% 1 67% 2 33% 1 67% 2 0% 0 100% 3

MPA 10 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

25% 1 75% 3 25% 1 75% 3 0% 0 100% 4

0% 0 100% 4 25% 1 75% 3 40% 2 60% 3

13% 1 88% 7 25% 2 75% 6 22% 2 78% 7

Fin

an

ce Total R&T

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

R&T

Cat Grade

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

F M F M F M

88

Table 5.55 Board of Review Composition by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

R&T PROF 22% 2 78% 7 11% 1 89% 8 11% 2 89% 8

CLIN PROF 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0

MPA 10 0% 0 100% 2 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1

25% 3 75% 9 25% 3 75% 9 31% 4 69% 9

R&T 9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

21% 3 79% 11 21 3 79 11 27% 4 73% 11

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15


Bo

ard

of

Revie

w

LAY/SRC

Full

Membership

final meeting

only

Main

membership

Table 5.56 Nominations Committee by Staff Type, Grade (where applicable) and Gender 2012/13 – 2014/15

9 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

PROF 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 100% 2

MPA 10 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 100% 1

0% 0 100% 3 0% 0 100% 3 0% 0 100% 3

20% 1 100% 4 40% 2 60% 3 40% 2 60% 3

11% 1 89% 7 25% 2 75% 6 25% 2 75% 6

No

min

ati

on

s R&T

Total R&T

Total MPA

Total Staff

LAY/SRC

Full

membership

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15


Court sub-committees are comprised Court members, SMG, Senate Assessors (SAs) and Heads of Services.

SAs are senior academics, appointed via nomination (In 2014/5 there were 5 male/ 2 female). When Court

appoints new members, and where they have control, the posts are advertised and appointed through

standard recruitment processes, with underrepresented groups encouraged to apply.

Membership of Senate sub-committees is defined by posts; gender balance is thus a function of who has

been appointed to particular roles.

The majority of all Senate sub-committees show good gender balance over the reporting period. Analysis

highlights Court sub-committees with extremely low female participation over the period: Finance;

Remuneration; Board of Review and Nominations.

We will work with our new Convenor of Court, using her knowledge and experience from 30% Club to

address diversity of membership over the next 4 years (Action 5.3.1).

89

vi. Committee workload

Comment on how the issue of ‘committee overload’ is addressed where there are small numbers of men or

women and how role rotation is considered.

Committee duties are monitored within the new WLM (S.5.4(viii)). We are mindful not to introduce gender

quotas for committees that leads to the same women (particularly in STEMM) who are willing and eligible to

contribute, being invited onto numerous committees.

Guidance on promoting diversity in committee membership will include recommendations to reduce

potential overload (Action 5.3.1).

vii. Institutional policies, practices and procedures

Describe how gender equality is considered in development, implementation and review. How is positive

and/or negative impact of existing and future policies determined and acted upon?

University committee cover sheets for agenda items require reflection on, and a statement about, equality

implications. Relevant guidance includes information on gender equality. The Equality and Diversity Manger

sits on strategic committees and reviews their policies, practices and procedures.

Gender equality is considered within the University’s EIA process. EDU uses EIAs along with staff to

anticipate negative impact for future policies, suggests amendments to avoid this, and establishes

mechanisms for monitoring and reviewing a policy. EIAs are also applied to existing policy reviews. Recent

issues identified range from campus development (need for childcare) to the revision of student maternity

policies.

viii. Workload model

Describe any workload allocation model in place and what it includes. Comment on whether the model is

monitored for gender bias and whether it is taken into account at appraisal/development review and in

promotion criteria. Comment on the rotation of responsibilities and if staff consider the model to be

transparent and fair.

The University has piloted an online WLM, with full rollout to Schools/RIs planned for autumn 2016.

The system covers the full range of teaching, clinical, administration, and research responsibilities, including

outreach, mentoring and AS activity. It flags circumstances to take account of when allocating and reviewing

workload including periods of maternity, shared parental, adoption and other leave and reasonable

adjustments for disability.

An EIA has been conducted throughout its development. Anecdotal comments from University and sector-

level discussions reveal a belief that women are tasked with heavy administrative roles instead of more

strategic positions, at the expense of their research and/or progression. Once implemented, the data from

the WLM will be reviewed by EDSC annually to assess if this occurs in practice (Action 5.3.2).

90

ix. Timing of institution meetings and social gatherings

Describe the consideration given to those with caring responsibilities and part-time staff around the timing of

meetings and social gatherings.

Social gatherings are often arranged out of core hours so those with teaching commitments are able to

attend. The majority of University-led social events are family-friendly and children are welcome to attend.

Through Departmental SAT activity, >13 Schools/RIs introduced core hours for core business: 10:00-16:00.

We will introduce core hours for significant University meetings and supplement this with guidance around

how local areas can implement similar arrangements. Start times for Court and Council of Senate were

moved to 14:00, to enable a 16:00 finish.

(Action 5.3.3).

x. Visibility of role models

Describe how the institution builds gender equality into organisation of events. Comment on the gender

balance of speakers and chairpersons in seminars, workshops and other relevant activities. Comment on

publicity materials, including the institution’s website and images used.

The University role models women through images our website, publications and strategy documents.

Female staff and students are featured throughout our Inspiring People strategy, serving as 17/30 case

studies; sending a strong message about our inspirational women in academic and P&S roles.

Following our original award, we introduced a feature in the University’s weekly e-newsletter to highlight

the achievements of all staff, using this to profile successful females.

The University supports a thriving programme of events featuring high profile women organised by staff and

students.

We recently named buildings and venues after prominent females: the new Postgraduate Club named after

Marion Gilchrist and the Isabella Elder Building after the philanthropist and education pioneer. Local areas

have raised the visibility of female role models in their own disciplines. The School of Law commissioned

portraits of its female professors which are hung prominently in the School. A main seminar room is named

Some recent events role modelling women

• Women In Research Network (WIRN) (s.5.2(iii)): incl. Professor Jane Norman (University of

Edinburgh) and Dr June McCombie MBE (University of Nottingham);

• Successful Women at Glasgow (SW@G): The first series of SW@G events featured presentations

from Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon and Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell;

• International Women’s Day 2016: co-ordinated by WIRN in 2015, with presentation from Professor

Andrea Nolan OBE (Principal, Edinburgh Napier University). Previous IWD events included

presentations from inspiring women in STEMM, including Professor Lesley Yellowlees CBE

(University of Edinburgh).

91

after Lady Cosgrove (eminent female judge), with the new Mary Stewart Building at our Garscube campus,

named after a pioneering women in veterinary medicine education.

Opening Ceremony of Isabella Elder Building, December 2015

L-R SRC President Liam King, Secretary of Court David Newall, Chair of the Ure Elder Trust, Dr C Joan McAlpine, DAO

Director Cathy Bell

xi. Outreach activities

Provide data on the staff involved in outreach and engagement activities by gender and grade. How is staff

contribution to outreach and engagement activities formally recognised? Comment on the participant uptake

of these activities by school type and gender.

Through our extensive Widening Participation (WP) Programme we work with 95 west of Scotland schools

selected by priority postcode areas.

The University recently participated in the Scottish Funding Council consultation on its Gender Action Plan,

which promotes a gendered approach to WP. We will work with our WP schools and stakeholders to

implement the plan, once launched, and review student participation in these activities by gender (Action

5.1.5).

The University hosts Science Connects that co-ordinates the STEMM Ambassador Programme in Scotland.

The University benefits from a large number of STEMM Ambassadors (currently 194F; 114M) who undertake

activities to encourage, often female, students into STEMM. In August 2015, we celebrated our 300th

STEMM

Ambassador at the University, the highest number for any university in Scotland.

As part of our original AS award we undertook to promote the involvement of women in science festivals

and outreach events. In 2014 60% of University staff taking part in the Glasgow Science Festival were female.

Students and staff organised and participated in highly successful Soapbox Science events, with 5 female

staff and PGRs presenting at the June 2015 Glasgow event.

Outreach is formally recognised in P&DR and Promotion. Outreach is not currently centrally-recorded by

grade and gender (and not by grade by Science Connects). SATs are encouraged to gather this data through

their AS surveys. We will centrally collate that data to gauge participation by grade and gender (Action

5.1.6).

92

xii. Leadership

Describe the steps that will be taken by the institution to encourage departments to apply for the Athena

SWAN awards.


Resource:

• Appointment of Gender Equality Officer (GEO) to support Athena SWAN activity at Departmental

and Institutional level;

• Athena SWAN Data Officer appointed in largest College (MVLS).

Institutional capacity:

• Creation of University Athena SWAN Network and dedicated SharePoint site.

• Development of College level Gender Equality Committee (GEC) in MVLS.

The University encourages Schools/RIs to apply for AS Awards.

We have a rolling schedule of submissions, with a goal to have all STEMM areas submitting by April 2017

(Action 1.6). Of the 9 AHSSBL Schools in the University, 1 holds AS Bronze, translated from GEM Award, with

4 working towards submission by April 2017.

An AS Network was established in August 2014 to bring SATs together to share best practice and build

capacity. It has met 4 times since launch. We will increase the number of Network meetings to 4/year and

will supplement this with AS Surgeries on specific issues related to the AS process (Action 1.4). GESG will

continue to support AS activity through critical readership of applications, identification and sharing of best

practice with SATs.

The University Gender Equality Officer (GEO) assists with the self-assessment and application process. The

GEO sits on Departmental SATs and provides advice on the submission process, policies and best practice.

MVLS appointed a dedicated AS Data Officer who supports SATs by collating staff and student data for self-

assessment. MVLS convened its GEC to support gender equality across the College; it is chaired by the Head

of College and brings SAT Chairs together to discuss common challenges, share best practice and review

draft applications.

We are improving our systems to better equip them to provide data required by AS. By August 2016, the

majority of AS staff data will be readily available to SATs on a central data dashboard, Qlikview, (Action 1.5).

The University publicly celebrates the achievements of SATs to encourage culture change. AS is recognised in

the new WLM, P&DR, and Promotion criteria. The Principal will host an Annual Reception for all SATs to

improve institutional acknowledgement of their extensive and vital work (Action 1.3).

93

6. SUPPORTING TRANS PEOPLE

Recommended word count: Bronze: 500 words ACTUAL 460 words| Silver: 500 words

i. Current policy and practice

Provide details of the policies and practices in place to ensure that staff are not discriminated against on the

basis of being trans, including tackling inappropriate and/or negative attitudes.

The Equality and Diversity Policy Appendix E provides a comprehensive framework covering: confidentiality,

name and gender changes, time-off for medical reasons, provision of gender-neutral facilities,

accommodation and managing transition (including optional action plan templates). The Dignity at Work and

Study Policy is also relevant and sets out our values and expectations for appropriate behaviour.

Our policies were developed in consultation with trans people. The Sexual Orientation Equality Group

(SOEG), chaired by our diversity champion responsible for transgender issues, includes the LGBT staff

network and Glasgow University Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender and Queer + Students’ Association

(GULGBTQ+) (2015 Scottish LGBTI Student Group of the Year). Potential negative or positive impact for trans

people are identified via EIAs. A range of policies (e.g. absence and workload model) include provisions for

trans people, such as adjustments for leave for reasons relating to gender reassignment.

In 2014/15 the University supported a member of staff through transition and involved her in the drafting of

the transition action plan template. She has made herself available as a role model for trans people at the

University. Students can select Mx as a prefix and choose between male/female/other for gender.

Estates and Building’s Space Management Policy recognises the need for gender neutral toilets: there are

currently gender neutral toilet facilities in 12 buildings across campus.

The University makes the Gender Identity Research and Education Society e-learning course available to all

staff and students. It further benefits from partnership working with Scottish Transgender Alliance (STA),

who ran trans awareness workshops with several Schools/RIs, as well Sports and Recreation staff.

ii. Monitoring

Provide details of how the institution monitors the positive and/or negative impact of these policies and

procedures, and acts on any findings.

Positive and/or negative impact is evaluated via liaison with staff and student networks and representatives

who feed back to the University through SOEG and EDU.

For example, GULGBTQ+ reported a lack of clarity on how to change student records. The EDU worked with

Registry, Student Services Enquiry Team and students to devise a clearer process. Involving trans students

helped us understand it is not always possible for a trans student to provide an alternative formal

identification. We therefore found a way to verify identity allowing a student to start using their chosen

name and gender at University without the unnecessary step of a statutory declaration form or other formal

ID.

Our #FullStop Campaign includes a microfiction dedicated to transphobia developed with trans staff and

students to signpost that inappropriate attitudes and comments can constitute bullying or harassment.

The University’s Harassment Volunteer Network is trained in LGBT issues and can feed back to EDU, in

confidence, when issues arise.

94

iii. Further work

Provide details of further initiatives that have been identified as necessary to ensure trans people do not

experience unfair treatment at the institution.

Students identified a need to raise awareness about appropriate use of pronouns. After an online photos

pronoun campaign, GULGBTQ+ started a new Pronoun Pledge campaign ( # GUPronounPledge ).

The University will support this campaign, linking it with STA training and the #FullStop campaign. To further

embed trans awareness, we will facilitate regular training sessions for staff and students across campuses.

(Action 5.2.2).

95

7. FURTHER INFORMATION


Please comment here on any other elements that are relevant to the application; for example, other

gender-specific initiatives that may not have been covered in the previous sections.

We are developing a new career framework for Professional and Support staff - Glasgow

Professional.

A project team (7 female/ 3 male), engaging with P&S staff defined what it means to be a

‘professional services’ member of staff working within the Colleges and University Services.

Glasgow Professional aims to enable P&S staff to develop professional skills supporting greater career

development and mobility. It will further embed values that support diversity and inclusion and better

implement new Charter Principles.

P&S staff have access a wide-range of in-house training and in addition, can apply for several internal

secondments specific funds for support career development:

• The International Experience Fund and

• The Robbie Ewen Fellowship

UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOWATHENA SWAN ACTION PLAN 2016 – 2020

1

1. INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE, SUPPORT AND ENGAGEMENT WITH ATHENA SWANRef. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility Success Measure

1.1 Inclusive and diverserepresentation around institutional Athena SWAN and gender equality initiatives.

Gender Equality SteeringGroup (GESG)established in January2014 to progress gender equality and Athena SWAN Action Plan.

GESG Membershipreviewed every 3 years to ensure it remains representative, maximises contributions from new members and so that members are not overburdened as their‘Departmental’ SAT rolesevolve.

First review to beconducted in January 2017, and triennially, thereafter.

Gender Equality Champion, (Vice Principal (VP), as Chair of GESG

GESG is representativeof academic and professional and support staff across STEMM and AHSSBL disciplines in our 4Colleges and UniversityServices.

1.2 Produce Athena SWANAnnual Report on progress of the Action Plan 2016-2020 to raise awareness and improve engagement with Athena SWAN and gender equality initiatives and achievements.

GESG currently reportsto University Court via Equality and Diversity Strategy Committee and Human Resources Committee.

College Management Groups informed of Athena SWAN updates by Gender Equality Officer, HR Managersand Heads of Schools/RIs with SATs.

Athena SWAN andgender related initiatives highlighted in weekly University e-newsletter and through local communications at College/School/RI level.

Draft annual report to beshared with Athena SWAN Network; Student Representative Council; Departmental SATs and College Management Groups.

The reports will also be disseminated at a new annual Athena SWAN celebration to be hosted by the VP and Gender Equality Champion (Action 1.3).

They will be available to all staff online via the Equality and Diversity Unit (EDU) webpages.

December 2016:Report shared/available online by December each year.

Gender EqualityChampion (VP)

GESG Gender Equality

Officer

Feedback from relevantgroups shows that colleagues feel informed of University progress with Athena SWAN Actions.

Local Athena SWANstaff surveys show> 75% awareness of Athena SWAN and related gender equality initiatives.


2

Ref. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility Success Measure1.3 Reward and recognise

the contribution of all individuals involved in Athena SWAN.

Athena SWAN isrecognised in University Workload Model, P&DR, and Promotion Criteria.

Athena SWAN highlighted as example of academic leadership in Performance and Development Review sample materials.

Principal to host annualreception to recognise the contributions and achievements of Athena SWAN SATs and Champions across the institution.

Evaluation to be embedded in event design to review impact of event on attendees’ sense of feeling valued around Athena SWAN contributions locally and at University level sothat action can be taken where required.

December 2016onwards.

Principal Gender Equality

Officer EDU

Administrator

Inaugural event hostedDecember 2016.

Positive feedback from attendees about sense of value by University for their contribution.>75% answering positively in evaluation forms to be circulated following the event.


3

Ref. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility Success Measure1.4 Build institutional

capacity and support through continued co- ordination of Athena SWAN Network.

Athena SWAN Networkestablished in August2014 to serve as a forum for SAT Chairs and members around common challenges, to share ideas and best practice.

Gender Equality Officer sits on all SATs and attends all meetings, where possible, to provide advice and support.

Increase number ofNetwork meetings to4/year around common themes and areas of best practice.

Supplement theNetwork meetings with‘surgeries’ every 2-3 months on common challenges associated with the application process. This will maximise the efficiencyof Gender Equality Officer support. The location of surgeries will be rotated across the main campuses to maximise opportunities to attend.

The next Networkmeeting is planned for June 2016 on‘Intersectionality and Athena SWAN’.

Surgeries are scheduled for the next 6 months:

June 2016: ‘UsingSurvey Data’.

August 2016:‘Understanding andPresenting HR Data’.

October 2016:‘Action planning around recruitment’ (see Action 2.3(iii).

Gender Equality Officer (Network co-ordination).

GESG (Feed up potential topicsvia local SAT work; publicise events in local areas)

Gender EqualityOfficer

Athena SWAN Data Officer

Representatives of relevant HRTeams

Network membersconsider it to be a valuable forum for sharing best practice, ideas and resources.

Demonstrated through good attendance min.35 participants (from 22 active SATs) at each event.

Surgeries are well attended and resolve issues and queries brought by SAT members, as demonstrated through immediate feedback from those attending.


4

Ref. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility Success Measure1.5 Provide data to support

SATs to progress gender equality work and Athena SWAN applications and action plans.

Athena SWAN DataOfficer appointed in largest College to support provision of HR and Student Data to SATs.

Gender Equality Officer collates, prepares and provides HR data to SATs made available by HR Systems Team; Recruitment Team and Pay, Performance and Reward Team.

Student Data (excl. admissions) is uploaded to a central data dashboard (Qlikview) so that it can bedownloaded by SATs.

HR Data will move ontoQlikview and will assist SATs greatly in providing automated reports on central staff data required by Athena SWAN.

Student admissions data will also be populated on the Qlikview dashboard.

August 2016

September 2016

HR Systems Team Planning and Business Intelligence (PBI)

Marketing and Recruitment and International Office (MaRIO)

PBI

SATs report that data isfit for purpose and easily accessible.

This will be explored at August 2016 Athena SWAN Surgery.

Improved access to data will support SATs to achieve and maintain/upgrade Departmental Awards.

1.6 All STEMM areas tohave submitted Athena SWAN applications by April 2017.

8/18 STEMMdepartments currently hold awards with a further 8 submitting in2016 and the remaining2 aiming for an April2017 submission.

Continue to supportSTEMM areas to embed Athena SWAN Charter in their Schools and Research Institutes.

All STEMM areas tohave submitted applications by end April 2017.

Gender EqualityChampion

Heads of College

All STEMM Departmentsto have prepared Athena SWAN submissions by April2017.


5

2. ATTRACTING A DIVERSE TALENT POOL – RECRUITMENT2.1 Procedures, Protocols and Reporting

Ref. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility Success Measure

2.1.1 Introduce mandatoryUnconscious Bias (UB) for all members of recruitment and promotion panels to ensure no unconscious bias in, particularly, the appointment and promotions of early career male staff in AHSSBL.

Members of CollegeManagement Groups and University Senior Managers completed face-to-face UB trainingbetween December 2015 and March 2016.

Recruitment and Selection course covers unconscious bias element.

Currently negotiating purchase of online UB course purchased from Skills Boosters, as 1-2 year trial.

Employee andOrganisational Development to introduce UB course completion as essential pre-cursor to registering for mandatory Recruitment and Selection Training.

HR Recruitment and Appointment Panel Chairs to ensure that panellists have completed Recruitment and Selection Training.

Any (new) members of College promotion committees who did not complete face-to-faceUB training in December or March to undertake online course.

Departmental SATs to embed completion of UB course within theirAction Plans.

Online course to bepurchased by May2016.

Rolled out online by Summer 2016, and available for all staff.

Essential component of Recruitment and Selection training by August 2016.

Equality andDiversity Manager (purchase and publicise)

Director, Employee and Organisational Development (EOD)

HR Recruitment Team (ensure panels have completed training)

Heads of College (ensure all members of promotion committees have completed UB training)

UB training availableonline for all staff.

Completion of online training essential precursor to registering for R&S training.

Data gathered and analysed show no evidence that men in AHSSBL disciplines are disproportionately biased in recruitment or promotion- at early career stages in AHSSBL.


6


2.1.2 Audit AppointmentCommittees’ gender balance to ensure at least one person of each sex represented.

Recruitment andSelection Policy updated to reflect the gender representation of the subject specialism and include requirement of each panel to have at least one member of each sex.

New e-recruitment system under development which will facilitate monitoring of recruitment panel composition at a central level.

Departmental SATs regularly monitor panel composition through manual collation ofrecruitment paperwork.

Regular auditing ofrecruitment panel composition to assess effectiveness of the policy change on this.

GESG to audit twice yearly and make recommendations for action to relevant College Management Groups or University Service Heads.

Data made available to Departmental SATs to inform their self- assessment process and subsequent action planning.

February 2017: Firstaudit undertaken 3 months following implementation of new e-recruitment system (scheduled for November 2016) and carried out every 6 months (August/February), thereafter.

HR RecruitmentManager,

Gender EqualityChampion,

College Management Groups

Local HR Managers

All recruitment panelsshown to include at least one member of each sex.

Action plans to address any issues in adhering to the policy identifiedas part of Departmental self-assessment and/or biannual review by GESG.

2.1.3 Improve collection andreporting of recruitment data to enhance understanding of acceptance rates for posts

Currently recruitmentdata denotes who was offered a post but does not consistently report on uptake of the offer. This is due to data input and updating procedures.

Produce briefing for HRRecruitment Team to highlight process improvements required and significance for achieving University KPIs

2016/17 academicsession: briefing to be delivered no later than October 2016.

HR RecruitmentManager

Equality andDiversity Manager

Data on offers and hiresfor academic posts available and deemed fit for purpose by GESGand Departmental SATs.


7

2.2 INCREASING PROPORTION OF FEMALE APPLICANTS FOR ADVERTISED POSTS AND ON JOB SEEKER’S REGISTER


2.2.1 (i) Review recruitmentmaterial from a gender perspective to ensure that the wording in the job advert, person specification and job description does not alienate potential female applicants.

Since March 2016, a listof gendered words to avoid in job adverts currently shared with all Departmental SATs to incorporate within Departmental Action Plans (list modified from Kat Matfield gender decoder for job ads app (http://goo.gl/Ow0zoi)

Constitute group fromHR Recruitment, Equality and Diversity Unit, College HR Teams to review job description templates for each role.

Group to make recommendations about changes to standard templates.

Revised templates to be circulated to all Colleges for use in future recruitment.

May 2016: Groupconstituted.

August 2016: Group to meet, review templates and make recommendations by.

August 2016 – February 2020: Group to meet every6 months to review list of gendered words and update job description templates, where relevant.

September 2016: Circulated to all Departmental SATs at Athena SWAN Network event to publicise Recruitment actions in this plan.


Local HR Managers

Gender EqualityOfficer

AHSSBL:Increase the proportion of female applicants to:

≥45% for Grades 8 and 9 vacancies(consistently been <40%over reporting period).

≥40% for Professor vacancies.(average 28% over reporting period).

http://goo.gl/Ow0zoi


8

Ref. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility

2.2.1(cont’d)

(ii) Prepare a virtualpamphlet outlining family-friendly policies, networks and schemes at the University to include in recruitment campaigns and packs.

Online material (incl.policy) relating to maternity leave revised and refreshed to provide clearer guidance and signposting to employees and managers.

This now includes a‘toolkit’ and flowchart of key processes and information, case examples on managing maternity and shared parental leave.

A Parents ‘Buddy’ Network has been established for new and expectant parents to get informal peer support.

Enhanced support for those taking maternity/parental leave in their return via Academic Returners and Research Support Scheme.

Conference Carer Fund currently being piloted to

Enhance communicationof these changes and schemes to current and future employees through production of a virtual pamphlet.

November 2016:Pamphlet produced in collaboration with new HR Recruitment Communicationsand Marketing Officer (to commence post in May 2016).

HR RecruitmentCommunications and Marketing Officer

HR Policy Officer Communications

and Public Affairs Office

STEMM:Increase the proportion of female applicants to:

≥45% for Grade 7 vacancies (consistently been less than 40% over reporting period).

≥35% for Grade 8 vacancies (average 25% over reporting period).

≥30% Grade 9 vacancies(less than or approx.20% over reporting period).

≥25% for Professorial vacancies (average 18% over reporting period).


9

provide contribution towards additional and extraordinary childcare costs for staff attending academic conferences.


2.2.1(cont’d)

(iii) Include Equality andDiversity Duties and Responsibilities in job descriptions for senior academic positions (Professorial and above).

The College of MVLShave already introduced wording in their job adverts for Associate Dean positions.

Nursing and Midwifery introduced Equality and Diversity question in interviews for recent appointment of the Florence Nightingale Chair of Nursing.

Mirror College of MVLSwording in all job descriptions for Professorial roles to signal value and recognition of this work, which is routinely overseen by female academic staff.

Produce sample questions that could be used by interview panelsaround Equality andDiversity and share with all appointment panel Chairs.

June 2016: Wordingincorporated within job descriptions.

September 2016: Sample questions produced by HR Recruitment in consultation with Equality and Diversity Unit and School of Medicine (Nursing andMidwifery).

October 2016: Circulated to all Departmental SATs at Athena SWAN Surgery to publicise Recruitment actions in this plan (see Action 1.5).


Local Heads of HR Equality and

Diversity Unit

As above.


10


2.2.2 Improve the use of theJob Seeker’s Register (JSR) by eligible female employees.

Analysis shows that only16% of eligible female employees register for JSR compared to 20% of eligible males.

Raise awareness of JSRamongst Principal Investigators (PIs) and line managers so that they encourage team members, equally, to register for potential redeployment.

Issue to be raised with Heads of School and Directors of Research Institutes (HoS/DRIs)at monthly HR meetings to be cascaded down to PIs and managers.

June 2016 onwards.

Stats on JSR usage and effectiveness prepared quarterly by HR Policy Officer.

HoS/DRIs Heads of Local HR

Teams HR Policy Officer

Increase in use of JSR byeligible employees to40%, with no significant gender differences.

2.2.3 Collate and centrally publicise profiles ofsuccessful female clinical academics to encourage applications from women for Clinical Lecturer posts, when they become available.

A range of local activities are being implementedto support clinical academics.

As part of 2012 award, we improved the role modelling of successful female academics through profiling in the University’ weekly e- newsletter.

Role model successful female clinicalacademics by producing short profiles accessible on the Athena SWAN webpages that can be linked to in recruitment packs.

Collate archived profiles created for weekly newsletter into central repository accessible on same webpage.

August 2016: collect interviews with rolemodels/gather newsletter archives.

September 2016 – October 2016: prepare content for web and sign-off from role models.

November - December 2016: publish online and highlight at Athena SWAN reception (see Action 1.3)

Communications and Public AffairsOffice HR Recruitment Marketing and Communications Officer Gender EqualityOfficer

Increase in proportion of female applicants toClinical Lecturer posts to≥ 50%.


11

3. CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRESSION3.1 DEVELOPMENT


3.1.1 Revise and launchUniversity MentoringScheme.

Pilot Cross-CollegeMentoring Scheme between STEMM Colleges run between2014-16.

Researcher Mentoring Scheme piloted at same time as part of HR Excellence Award.

Women’s Cross-College Mentoring Scheme runsin AHSSBL Colleges.

Early Career Development Participants assigned an ECDP Mentor.

Negotiation is ongoing with developers of SUMAC Mentor Matching Software to assist with centralisation of scheme.

Consolidation of Collegeand Researcher Mentoring programmes into one centrally co- ordinated Mentoring Scheme open to all academic staff.

As part of matching process, applicants will be offered a range of areas to be taken into consideration which will include race/ethnicity.

Local discipline-specific mentoring will still be available through School/Research Institute Schemes.

August 2016:SUMAC software purchase concluded.

September –October 2016University Scheme Advertised and Application process opened

January 2017: Matching process completed and scheme launched.

Director, EOD Requests for BMEMentor accommodated as evidenced through feedback on satisfaction levels with matching process sought from Mentees once matched.


12

3.1.2 Develop female leadership skillsthrough new courses.

Women sponsored onAurora programme.

Leaderships courses developed with reasonable female representation with scope for improvement.

Revise ALP provision toall staff types andrebrand.

Develop Emerging Leaders programme for all staff types and challenge nominations from any College if they are all same sex.

April 2016 – April2018

Director, EOD At least 45%participation in newleadership programmes over first 2 years.

3.1.3 All researchers toundertake at least 5 days CPD per annum

CROS 2015 showed that57% of respondents (63%of Males; 68% ofFemales) had undertaken3 or more days of CPD in the past year (compared with 49% in 2013 and49% for the RussellGroup Universities

Increase CPDundertaken by researchers in line with the HR Excellence Action Plan.

HR Systems Team to establish mechanism to record training on core HR records

Review CPD undertaken by researchers in next CROS.

April 2016-April2018

Vice-PrincipalResearch

60% of respondents innext CROS having undertaken 5 days of CPD in the previous year, with no significant difference in the responses from male and female researchers.


13

3.2 PROGRESSION, RECOGNITION AND REWARD


3.2.1 Improve perception of staff who work part-time about prospects for promotion via case studies highlighting those who workpart-time that have successfully applied for promotion.

Section on additionalconsiderations introduced in promotion application following Athena SWAN Bronze Action Plan 2012.

Develop case studies tohighlight career progression and promotion of staff who work part-time, including male and female staff from both AHSSBL and STEMM disciplines.

Develop and release case studies following the first promotionround of the new criteria so that they reflect those who work part-time successfully applying under the new criteria.

October 2016:Revised promotion criteria released.

January 2016 - July2017: Promotion process.

August - October2017: Approach successful part-time staff to produce case studies.

October 2017: Case Studies published online and launched at 2017DemystifyingPromotionConference.

October 2017 onwards: Collate and analyseresponses to Departmental SAT surveys on this issue to measure impact of case studies at local level.

HR Pay, Performance and Reward Team (PPR)

Incorporate questioninto annualdemystifying promotion conference on perceptions of part-time staff of promotion prospects with aim of75% positive response by October 2018.

≥75% positive response from part-time staff in SAT Surveys by October2018.


14


3.2.2 Organise University-wide DemystifyingPromotion Conference, which has been shown to be successful practice at other HEIs (University of Warwick) to clarify promotion processes and address common challenges.

Promotion workshopsrun across all 4 Colleges at School/RI and College level.

Assistant Vice-Principalof Learning and Teaching delivered workshops to clarify LT&S criteria and career-track.

Promotion Champions and Mentors have been introduced across STEMM departments as part of Athena SWAN work.

Presentation onPromotion delivered at2014 Research Staff Conference.

Hold university-wideevent to include sessions on: applying with

confidence and encouraging women not to wait too long to apply.

accounting for periods of maternity, paternity, adoption and part-time working inpromotion applications.

Workshop on new Teaching criteria to map skills and experience to new criteria.

Research staff specific issues around promotion and progression e.g. routes to Professorship and change of track.

New AcademicClinician Pathway.

October 2016:inaugural event and annually thereafter

PPR College HR Teams Equality and

Diversity Unit Research, Strategy

and Innovation Office

High attendance andengagement with the conference (at least 150 delegates; at least 45% female)

Positive evaluation following the event to include questions on impact of conference on understanding of promotion process and criteria and confidence to apply.

≥75% positive response to evaluation from male and female respondents with no statistically significant differences in positive responses from male/female staff.

Improvement in CROS2017 on question about prospects for promotion to 80% overall with no significant differences between male and female responses.


15

New AcademicClinician Pathway.

Departmental SATs to contribute to parallel discipline-specific workshops and application surgeries based on outcomes of their self-assessment processes.


3.2.3 Promotion workshopsin AHSSBL disciplines tobe open to all staff.

Promotion workshopsoffered to allmale/female staff inCollege of Arts.

College of Social Sciences run women-specific promotion events that are well received by attendees.

Dean for Learning and Teaching ran workshops for all male/female University Teaching staff.

Promotion workshops inall Colleges to be opento male and female staff. Issues which are known to disproportionately affect male/female staff to be covered.

April 2016 onwards Heads of College College HR Teams

Male and Female staffencouraged to attendpromotion workshops which are currently offered at the College level.

All sessions at the annual promotion conference to be opento staff of any gender.


16


3.2.4 Academic ClinicianPathway Working Group (ACPWG) to undertake Equality Impact Assessment of the proposed criteria/pathway, with a particular focus on gendered implications.

ACPWG convened anddeveloped new draft criteria and process for improved progression pathway for academic clinicians.

Thorough EIA to beundertaken of the new criteria, with particular consideration given to the gendered impact of proposed process and actions to remedy any issues identified.

Clinical Academic SAT Chair to be consulted on the impact of the new pathway as part of this process.

June- August 2016Criteria to be clarified and EIA undertaken.

October 2016: NewPathway Launched.

Head of College(MVLS)

Heads of HR (College MVLS)

Male and FemaleClinical Academics feel positively that the new pathway is clear, values all their skills and experience and that they are supported to apply evidenced via≥75% positive response on SAT surveys by October 2018.

3.2.5 Apply Professorialzoning process to ensure that newly promoted Professors are zoned correctly

Professorial zoningintroduced to ensure parity of pay within Professorial Zones

Continue to undertakeProfessorial zoning for newly promoted Professors to ensure accurate zoning.

August 2016 andannually: in time with promotion round

HR Director HR PPR Team

Reduction in GenderPay Gap in Professorial Zones to <1% in each Zone by 2020.

3.2.6 Ensure parity of pay inprofessorial salaries at appointment.

Review starting salariesfor Professorial positions to identify whetherthere is a discrepancy at hiring stage and if so, implement plan to address this.

2016/17 session:Review undertaken and findings/actions reported to HR Committee.

HR Director HR PPR Team

Reduction in GenderPay Gap in Professorial Zones to <1% in Zones by 2020.


17


3.2.8 Review impact of newReader promotion criteria on number of applications from eligible female staff

Revised criteria for therole of Reader developed for 2015/16 promotion round.

Evaluate the impact ofthe new criteria on the numbers of female staff applying to that grade.

Evaluate the clarity of new criteria with delegates at the Demystifying Promotion Conference to identify any gender differences in understanding.

Encourage SATs in Schools/RIs with a research focus to incorporate questions of the role of Reader within their Athena SWAN surveys.

September 2016:Evaluation following2015/16 promotion round on numbers of women applying and success rates.

November 2016: Carry out evaluation with attendees at the Demystifying Promotion Conference.

May 2016 onwards.

PPR Team Report on potentialimpact of new criteria produced for GESG.

Positive response from both male and female attendees re: clarity of Reader criteria (min.75% in agreement on clarity)

Question on Readership embedded in Departmental SATs that have research focus.


18


3.2.9 Increase proportion ofstaff undertaking P&DR training

P&DR training movedonline following feedback from staffabout the inconvenience of attending face-to-face training.

14% of all staff have accessed the online training since it was created in 2014/15.

Improve communicationabout the training available throughuniversity e-newsletter, discussions at College Management Group meetings at the launch of the P&DR cycle and increase its visibility within the P&DR information and forms on the University HR webpages.

July – September2016: Coincide with launch of next P&DRcycle

Head of EOD;PPR; College HR Managers

Improved proportion ofstaff accessing the training to:35% in 2015/16 P&DRcycle;45% by 2017/18 cycle;

60% of all staff by2018/19 cycle.

3.2.10 Improves usefulness ofP&DR and sense of value for staff undertaking it

Working Groupestablished to evaluate and revise the P&DR process

Strengthen thedevelopment aspect of P&DR to better ensure that academic staff feel they are given the opportunity to develop a personal development plan as part of the process

July –September2016: Revised process to be launched at next P&DR cycle

Head of PPR Improved response in2018 Staff Survey(the next biennial StaffSurvey following 2016P&DR round) toquestions about usefulness (Q4-4 ) at least 70% and Value (Q4-6) at least 70%


19

4 SUPPORT FOR MANAGING CAREER BREAKS AND FLEXIBLE WORKING4.1 Support for maternity and adoption leave: Before Leave; During Leave and Returning to Work


4.1.1 Ensure line managersare aware of the new maternity checklist for use Before, During and After an employees’ maternity leave.

Maternity Checklistcreated to structure support Before, During and After Leave.

Create flag in Core HRsystem so that when employees make a maternity leave request their line manager is automatically e-mailed a copy of the Checklist and Guidance Notes for Managers.

Impact of this measured by polling employees taking maternity leave between September2016 –September 2017,3 months after return.

Flag created andoperational from August 2016 onwards.

December 2017

Head of HR Systems

Deputy HR Director

Mechanism in placealerting all managers to the Checklist and Managers’ Guidance.

≥95% positive responseabout use of checklist in planning maternity leave.

4.1.2 Update MaternityChecklist with specific guidance on arranging cover.

Maternity Checklistcreated.

Produce enhancedguidance to be included in Before Leave section of checklist directing managers and employees as to the appropriate responsibilities around arranging cover.

April – June 2016 HR Policy Officer ≥95% positive responseabout use of checklist in planning cover for leave (As per staff poll in Action 5.1.3)


20


4.1.3 Enhancing user-friendlysupport for Adoption and Shared Parental Leave policies

Maternity Leave policiesrefreshed and additional guidance created.

Apply same model asmaternity leave policies to Adoption and Shared Parental Leave policies e.g. reorganisation, Checklist and Flowchart.

Impact of this measured by polling employees taking maternity leave between September2016 –September 2017,3 months after return

April - June 2016

December 2017

HR Policy Officer

Deputy HR Director

Consistent support andguidance online for Maternity/Adoption/SPL policies.

≥95% positive response about use of checklist in planning leave.

4.1.4 Review use of Parental Buddy Network

Parental Buddy Network established online sostaff can contact Buddy from list for peer- support.

Investigate uptake and ensure that buddies arenot overburdened.

March/April 2017 Gender Equality Officer

Positive response to uptake of buddies (interms of usage) and feedback that Buddies not overburdened.

≥3 requests/enquiries per buddy per year.

4.1.5 Raise awareness ofrefreshed maternity leave guidance and support amongst employees and managers.

Maternity guidanceupdated and enhanced.

Host Parental LeaveRoadshow to highlight recent changes to guidance and clarify support for employees and managers.

June 2016 –no laterthan 24 June, (when Glasgow schools break for summer).

HR Policy Officer College and

University Services HR Officers

Positive feedback fromevent evaluation.At least 75% positively responding to questions on improved understanding;potential use of new resources; andlikelihood of embeddingin local areas (e.g. via Departmental SAT work).


21

4.1.6 Help all staff benefitfrom experience and insights of maternity/adoption/SPL returners.

Prepare short videos ofparents discussing their experience of maternity and shared parental leave.

September 2016 –September 2017

Communications and Public Affairs Office

Videos available onlineand receiving high number of unique visitor hits as per analytics.

No less than 260 unique visitors/annum (approximate number of maternity/paternity and adoption leavers in2014/15).

4.1.7 Develop guidance, byfunder, on maternity leave provision.

Departmental SAT workdemonstrated lack of awareness around coverfor researcher maternity leave and funding provided by research funders.

Awareness raised at local levels through all-staff emails from Directors of Research Institute.

To clarify supportavailable to researchers on different fellowshipsand grants, develop specific research staff flowchart by funder. Initially in MVLS where this has been specifically identified as an issue (e.g. several of main funders like British Heart Foundation offer no support/provision).

September –November 2016: Convene WorkingGroup of Volunteers

November 2016- February 2017: Review funder policies and produce resource document.

May 2017: PublishFlowchart.

March 2017: Share draft resource with Maternity Researchers Working Group across HE Sector and Athena SWAN Scotland Network for comments/wider use.

Heads of HR inCollege of MVLS

MVLS Gender Equality Committee

Improved clarity forresearchers and line managers demonstratedthrough feedback in Departmental SAT surveys


22

4.1.8 Compile list of localbreastfeeding rooms identified by Departmental SATs and publish on HR Webpages.

Parental Leave policiesand support improved as part of Athena SWAN Bronze Action Plan 2012.

Arrangements/roomsidentified by local SAT teams as part of their action plans to be compiled and made available on family- friendly section of HR policy webpages.

April 2016 onwards HR Policy Officer Female staff returningto work able to easily identify spaces where they can express and store milk.

4.2 Flexible Working and Caring Responsibilities


4.2.1 Raise awareness of possible workingpatterns under theFlexible Working Policy

Flexible Case Studies developed as part of theAthena SWAN BronzeAction Plan 2012.

Flexible Top Tips developed.

Continue to update case studies to reflectdiverse working patterns and staff from different job families.

Flexible Top Tips to be published alongside Case Studies.

April 2016 - January 2018

Gender Equality Officer

Broad range of flexible working arrangementsand diverse categories of staff (academic, professional and support) represented in the case studies.

At least 10 case studies by 2018

4.2.2 Supporting transition tofull-time work following part-time working or career break.

Develop guidance onreturning to (full-time) work following a career break or period of part- time working utilising experience of working with DJT Fellows and incorporating advice and principles from research councils and learned societies on this:

Guidance developedand communicated to all staff throughout 2016/17 to be in place no later than July 2017.

Gender EqualityChampion (VP)

Comprehensiveresources produced to support career transitions and returners.


23


4.2.2(Con’t)

(e.g. Royal Society, Parent Carer Scientist; MRC Guidance on Career Breaks and Flexible Working; WellcomeTrust, A Returners’Guide to Research).

Many of the principles are applicable to all job families.

4.2.3 Enhance nursery andcrèche provision as part of CampusDevelopment Project.

Feasibility studyconducted by Secretary of Court and Campus Services Manager as to whether current nursery provision could be expanded on-site.

Planning permissionsought for new childcare facilities, included in campus redevelopment plans.

Plans subject toplanning permission process and work on redevelopment currently out for tender.

Anticipated start date for development construction- TBC

Director of Estates and Planning

Secretary of Court Gender Equality

Champion (VP)

Enhanced on-sitechildcare available for staff.


24

Ref. Action: Description Action already taken Actions Planned Timescale Responsibility Success Measure4.2.4 Evaluate pilot

Conference Carer Fund to gauge staff need and amount of funding tobe made available.

Pilot fund launched andadministered by the Equality and Diversity Unit

Conduct evaluationfollowing completion of pilot with those who applied and those who registered an interest in the scheme.

Investigate with pilot participants the usefulness of the fund and the appropriateness of the funding available.

Produce a report about the viability of roll out of the scheme and any changes that should be made to ensure its effectiveness.

September 2016:Pilot to be concluded

October- November2016: Evaluation conducted

December 2016: Report and recommendations about roll-out presented at GESG.

January 2017: Roll out of recommended Scheme

Gender Equality Officer (Equality and Diversity Unit)

GESG

Positive response fromevaluation of pilot leading to roll-out of a formal scheme (subject to any agreed improvements) by January 2017.

4.2.5 Identify and invitecarers to act as‘buddies’.

Parental Buddy Networklaunched to provide peer support to staff with caring responsibilities.

Pilot Conference Carer Fund introduced (see Action 5.4).

Identify carers whoapply for ConferenceCarer Fund and invite tojoin ‘Parental BuddyNetwork’.

Expand Parental Buddy Network to a Parents and Carers Network.

April- September2016: When Pilot to be concluded.September –November 2016Collect bios and addCarers to the list.

December 2016- re- launch expanded Parents and Carers Buddy Network at Principal’s inaugural Athena SWAN Reception.

Gender EqualityChampion

Equality and Diversity Unit

Parents and CarersNetwork launched and in place.


25


4.2.6 Raise awareness ofEmployee AssistanceProgramme provided by Optum.

Highlight the advice andcounselling servicesavailable free of charge to staff via the University’s weekly e- newsletter.

Include a feature at least every quarter highlighting potential work-life balance issues and those related to caring responsibilities which give rise to stress and the assistanceavailable to support staff through this via Optum.

June 2016: Developand publish firstfeature to coincide with National Carers Week 6-12 June2016.

September 2016: Develop second feature to coincide with National Go Home of Time Day23 September 2016 (to link in with Working Families national campaign).

November 2016: Develop third feature to coincidewith National StressAwareness Day – 2November 2016

Communications and Public AffairsOffice

Increased reportedusage of Optum EAPwith services accessedby at least 35* members of staff (by phone orone-to-one counselling)by 2018.

*This number represents 40% of total number of average staff reportedly suffering from stress-related illness within the University.


26

5. DRIVING ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE CHANGE5.1 ENHANCING CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF KEY ISSUES


5.1.1 Improve disclosure ofequality monitoring details.

Twice yearly emails sentto staff requesting updates to their online Core HR equality details.

Enhanced transparencyof the use of data as part of equality charters work to increase willingness of staff to disclose via links to updated Equality and Diversity Webpages.

Communicationtwice a year from HR Director and Race Equality Champion (VP)

HR Director Race Equality

Champion (VP) Equality and

Diversity Unit

Reduce proportion ofoverall staff with race details as ‘Unkown’ from 12.5% to 5% by April 2019.

5.1.2 Use Race EqualityCharter Mark as framework to explore the attraction, retention and development of BME staff and studentsthrough analysis by race and gender.

Active Race EqualityGroup currently examining recruitment data by race as well as student attainment.

Focus groups run with BME students by SRC Race Equality Officer to learn more about their experiences around learning, methods and environment.

Convene a workinggroup to collect and examine student and staff data on admissions/recruitment, progression/retention and attainment at the intersection of race and gender and identifyareas for action.

2016/17 session:Working Group Convened, HR/Student Data Gathered and Analysed by Race and Gender.

2017/18 Session: Report on findings and devise Action Plan.

Race EqualityChampion (VP)

Equality andDiversity Unit

Student Representative Council (SRC)

Understanding of issuesarising at intersection of race and gender evidenced via Action Plan developed to address these and endorsed by theEquality and DiversityStrategy Committee.


27


5.1.3 Increase awareness of the use of survey dataand instil a sense of engagement with it so that staff are more inclined to complete it.

Staff Leavers surveys previously contractedout.

In-house surveys developed and launched in March 2015.

Produce local reports from the new survey onthe reasons people leave to improvedepartmental understanding and Athena SWAN self- assessments.

Assist HoS/DRIs to communicate high-level messages and demonstrate the usefulness of the information that the survey provides.

April 2016 onwards. Deputy HRDirector

HoS/DRIs

75% of leavers each year complete survey byApril 2019.

5.1.4 Disaggregate staffsurvey 2016 results by gender and other protected characteristics, particularly race, to enhance our intersectional understanding of gender equality.

Reports on staff surveyresults commissioned from survey administrator by each protected characteristic.

Report on gender and job family produced.

New tool purchased which will enable University to disaggregate data in- house.

Prepare and analysestaff survey data by gender and other protected characteristics to aid consideration of gender equality from intersectional perspective.

September 2016(following completion and initial ‘headline’ analysis of Staff Survey)

HR Director EDSC

Reports considered byEDSC and potential issues identified for further exploration and/or action.


28


5.1.5 Embed Scottish FundingCouncil Gender Action Plan in outcome agreements and widening participation activity

Contributed todevelopment of SFC Gender Action Plan via attendance at consultation events and submissions to official consultation.

Work with SFC to embedthe Actions in the plan.

Interim plan due for publication at the time of writing.

2016 -2020(targets in interim SFC plan by 2030 outwith life of Action Plan)

Principal; Gender Equality

Champion Vice-Principal

Learning and Teaching

SFC Gender Action Planembedded in Outcome Agreements; Policies and Practices by 2020.

5.1.6 Centrally collate dataon outreach activities by grade and gender.

Departmental SATs havestarted to collect this information via AS staff surveys.

Encourage allDepartmental SATs to include questions about outreach in surveys.

Collate information for STEMM and AHSSBL disciplines at a University level and report to the GESG on any significant findings from an analysis of that information.

March 2016onwards.

Collate information following each Athena SWAN submission round from November2016 onwards.

Report to GESG twice a year following analysis of collated information December and May, annually.

GESG Departmental SAT

Chairs

Useable data sets onoutreach activities by gender and discipline to report to GESG and produce appropriate actions where any gender imbalance is identified.

5.2 Training and Awareness Raising

5.2.1 Increase the proportionof staff completing online Equality and Diversity Training.

Online Equality andDiversity available for all staff.

Equality Champions lobbied SMG to make training mandatory.

E&D training nowmandatory for all staff.

Communications from Senior Management, including the Principal mandating that all staff complete the training.

April 2016 – April2017

Principal Heads of College,

Schools and Research Institutes

≥90% staff completingthe training by April2017.


29


5.2.2 Continue to facilitatetrans awareness training across the institution.

Scottish TransgenderAlliance have provided training to: Advisers of Study,

Heads of School Admin and Student Services reps (2 x 3hr sessions in 2014)

Adam Smith Business School (1.5hr session in 2014)

Sports andRecreation Service

Institute of Health and Well-Being 2x 3hr sessions 2016

SRC, GULGBTQ+ and Staff Network reps attended Harassment Volunteers Network (HVN) meeting to provide context andadvice from an LGB and T viewpoint of bullying and harassment.

STA delivering upcomingtraining to: Student Learning

Service; School of Modern

Languages and Cultures.

EDU in negotiation with STA about running these as regular sessions(twice a year).

26 and 27 April 2015

TBC, twice yearly from April 2015 onwards

Equality andDiversity Unit.

Increased awareness ofissues affecting trans people at the University as evidenced through: reduced reports of

bullying and harassment from trans staff and students to the HVN.

feedback and reports on trans staff and student experience fromSRC, GULGBTQ+ and the Staff Sexual Orientation and Equality Group


30

5.3 University Committees: Representation, Workload and Timing


5.3.1 Promote diversity incommittee membership.

Court committed to40:40:20 gender approach for lay membership of Court and relevant sub- committees.

2 new female members appointed to Court through open recruitment in 2015.

Elizabeth Passey, co- founder 30% Club HE Chapter, appointed as Convenor of Court.

Identify mechanisms forpromoting diversity and reducing workload where it transpires that members are overloaded- e.g. more rapid role rotation; shadowing or substitute roles.

Guidance to be endorsed by EDSC.

Produce guidance2016/17 academic session, to be endorsed and introduced no later than July 2017.

Secretary of Court Clerk of Senate

Improvement in thediversity of Court sub- committees.

5.3.2 Ensure women are notdisproportionately overburdened with large administrative roles.

Workload Model pilotedacross institution and being rolled-out across all Colleges.

Use the Workload Modelto compare administrative and research allocation by gender to explore any statistically significant differences in the distribution of these tasks.

Report to be produced

2016/17 academicyear: Expectation that Schools and RIs will start to implement workload model.

August/September2017: Report of allocation by gender

Heads of College Head of

School/Directors of Research Institutes

No statisticallysignificant differences in academic workload allocation for administrative tasks by gender.


31


5.3.2 (Con’t)

annually and presentedto the EDSC via theGESG.

Recommendations for action to be made by EDSC where significant differences are identified.

produced andprovided to GESGfor analysis

December 2017/ January 2018: Findings and recommendations of GESG fed up to the EDSC for discussion and implementation of recommended actions.

5.3.3 Core Universitymeetings to be held within Core Hours.

Core hours policy introduced forfollowing meetings in consultation with members about most effective definition of ‘core hours’:

SMG PAG Roundtable Senate Meetings Court Meetings

April 2016 –April2017

Principal Secretary of Court Clerk of Senate

Core hours policy forcore University level meetings in place and followed.

institution application bronze and silver award · mark (gem) trial, with the school of law...

Documents