The School of HCA (GEM/ECU) Gender Culture Survey Staff 2013

Transcription

1 Staff Survey 2013 As part of its wider commitment to promoting gender equality in academia, the School of History, Archaeology and Classics (HCA) embarked upon the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) Gender Equality Charter Mark (GEM) awards scheme in January Activity commenced with the appointment of a self-assessment team, to manage quantitative and qualitative bench-marking and report writing. In July and November 2013, gender culture surveys of postgraduate students, and academic/support staff, respectively, were implemented through Bristol Online Surveys (BOS); to gauge the existing cultural climate in the School. The staff survey ran from October 29 th until November 30th, and generated 63 responses. An request was sent to 113 academic staff (37 females and 76 males) and 33 support staff (27 females and 6 males), generating an overall response rate of 43.2%. Respondents included 1 Professor, 5 Readers, 7 Senior Lecturer/Senior Researcher, 13 Lecturers, 5 Postdoctoral Researcher/Junior Researcher, 2 Holders of a Research Fellowship, 1 HTBN Teacher, Tutor or other and 15 members of support staff. An additional 14 respondents elected not to disclose their current role. As such, it was impossible to accurately calculate the academic and support staff response rates, though the academic response rate was not less than 30.1% (34 responses) and the support staff response rate was not less than 45.5% (15 responses). 29 females and 25 males opted to take part, with 9 Prefer not to say. Again, the prefer not to say option makes it impossible to accurately calculate male/female response rates, though the female response rate was not less than 45.3% and the male response rate was not less than 30.5%. As such, subsequent surveys might target male participation in particular as an area for improvement. It should also be noted that HCA exhibits demographic characteristics typical of an Athena SWAN/GEM participant, with higher percentages of male academic staff and female support staff, and the gender equality initiative should investigate this further. To optimise participation, an request and URL link to BOS were circulated by Ian Ralston (Head of School). An reminder after two weeks might have increased participation further and should be implemented for future surveys. To encourage engagement, it may be necessary to stress that the value of this activity transcends the gender equality award itself. Reform to improve policies and practices relating to the promotions process and worklike balance benefit everyone who works in the department, regardless of gender. Staff concerns over anonymity may also have impacted detrimentally upon the rate of participation, and reassurances should be circulated with the request in future. As this activity was successful in gauging the current cultural climate in HCA, the School would be advised to run the surveys on an annual or biennial basis. This would facilitate a comparative analysis of results and enable the self-assessment team to monitor and measure progress for subsequent GEM applications. Questions E1 and G3 of the GEM action and analysis template also relate to the survey results as a whole, and staff responses to question 7 in particular. 1

2 The survey was divided into 5 sections, addressing Workplace Culture, Participation and Promotions Practices, Leadership and Management Commitment to Equality of Opportunity, Reputation and Social Responsibility and Monitoring Information. 1. WORKPLACE CULTURE Summary: This section assessed staff perceptions of the department's workplace culture. An overall review of staff responses to Question 1 suggested that the workplace culture in HCA is generally favourable, with scope for improvement. 63.5% of staff agree that colleagues pay as much attention when women speak as when men do (44.8% of females and 84.0% of males), though the team may wish to investigate why a significantly lower proportion of female staff believe this to be the case. 65.1% of respondents disagree that colleagues have condescending attitudes towards women (62.1% of females and 68.0% of males), and an impressive 73.0% of staff agree that work-related social activities are welcoming to both women and men (72.4% of females and 72.4% of males). This was the highest score for this question in CHSS. Regarding gender imbalance in HCA, 34.9% of respondents disagree that staff in leadership roles demonstrate a visible commitment to diversity (41.4% of females and 32.0% of males); and 28.6% of staff agree that men are more likely to be chosen for special activities than women (34.5% of females and 20.0% of males). As this suggests that a significant percentage of female staff believe that the cultural climate in HCA is balanced in favour of male staff, the E & D team would be advised to investigate the underpinning reasons for this perception further. Transparency regarding existing policies and practices is also an issue in HCA. 28.6% of staff disagreed that the School makes it clear that unsupportive language and behaviour are not acceptable (41.4% of females and 20.0% of males), and 19.0% of staff responded Don t know (10.3% of females and 24.0% of males). The Don t know response rate rose to 41.3% in relation to whether inappropriate images are allowed in the School (41.4% of females and 44.0% of males). Clearer guidelines would address ambiguity relating to gender equality policies and practices. As 77.8% and 84.1% of staff have not attended training in gender equality or unconscious bias respectively, there is also scope for improvement in this area. Training would be of particular value to members of staff involved in the annual review, mentoring and interview processes. Respectively, 46.6% and 50.8% of staff expressed an interest in undertaking training in gender equality and unconscious bias. One respondent to question 4 added that, Those in management positions in particular should be obliged to undertake some training in equality and diversity (not just gender-related). Qualitative responses to this section also noted that, I do not think that the School or any individuals that I have encountered within the School exhibit explicit gender bias. However I do feel that, even relative to uneven representation in our disciplines more generally, women are under-represented among our academic staff, particularly (but not only) in senior and/or leadership roles. Have we ever had a female Head of School? a female Head of History? a female Professoriate? Out of new staff hired in the last 5 years, how many have been women? I 2

3 do think more needs to be done to address this (e.g. by promoting greater diversity on appointment panels, or reviewing the gender distribution of recent appointments). Conclusions: - The overall workplace culture in HCA is favourable in general, with scope for improvement. - A majority of staff agree that colleagues pay equal attention when females and males speak, and disagree that colleagues have condescending attitudes towards women. With respective majorities of 63.5% and 65.1%, the team should target these figures for improvement. - The School is very successful in offering social activities which are inclusive to men and women, and this is equally felt by both sexes. - A significant percentage of staff do not believe that leadership roles demonstrate commitment to diversity and that attitudes in HCA favour male colleagues. This is particularly true of female staff. - Clearer guidelines on practices and policies relating to unsupportive language and behaviour, and inappropriate images, would be beneficial. - Training opportunities in gender equality and unconscious bias should be promoted and would be well received. 2. PARTICIPATION & PROMOTION PRACTICE: Summary: This section assessed staff perceptions of HCA s policies and practices, for encouraging the participation and promotion of both sexes at all levels. A majority of responses to the survey were positive, suggesting that current practices in the School are in general inclusive and effective, though a gender divide is apparent in staff responses to a number of questions. 71.0% of respondents agree/strongly agree that HCA provides useful networking opportunities (69.0% of females and 88.0% of males); and 66.7% agree/strongly agree that the School provides a helpful annual review (69.0% of females and 60.0% of males). 60.3% of staff agree that individuals are treated on their merits, irrespective of gender (51.7% of females and 64.0% of males), though 23.8% responded Don t know (31.03% of females and 20.0% of males). Similarly, 61.9% of staff agree that work is allocated on a clear and fair basis, irrespective of gender (48.3% of females and 68.0% of males), while 23.8% Don t know (34.5% of females and 20.0% of males). Regarding long-hours culture and work-life balance, 71.4% of staff agree that departmental meetings are scheduled within core hours (75.9% of females and 64.0% of males), though 20.6% again responded Don t know. Regarding scope for improvement therefore, the Don t know response rate is relatively high throughout this section and clearer policy guidelines might help to polarise the results in subsequent surveys. 46.8% of staff Don t know whether HCA rewards the full range of skills and experience in annual reviews (48.3% of females and 44.0% of males), and this rises to 51.6% with regard to the promotions process (44.8% of females and 56.0% of males). As 12.9% and 16.1% of staff responded Disagree to these questions, respectively, and 28.6% 3

4 disagree that they understand the career development and promotion/progression process (31.0% of females and 28.0% of males), transparency and understanding of issues relating to the workload model and promotion should be addressed as a priority. 34.9% of respondents also disagree that HCA provides useful opportunities to act as a mentor (31.0% of females and 28.0% of males) and 19.0% Don t know ; while 34.9% disagree that staff are given useful opportunities to have a mentor of their own (37.9% of females and 24% of males) and 14.3% Don t know. Participation in the UHRS Mentoring Connections scheme might enable HCA to tap into existing resources for development of a mentoring scheme to alleviate these issues. Regarding career development, 69.8% of staff agree that they are encouraged to take up career development and training opportunities (75.9% of females and 68.0% of males); and 66.7% agree that they are encouraged to represent the department externally and/or internally (72.4% of females and 72.0% males). It should be noted that, respectively, 23.8% and 19.0% of staff disagree with these statements, though mentoring and annual review could help to alleviate these perceptions by encouraging less confident individuals to participate in development activities, regardless of gender. Qualitative responses to Question 13 highlighted positive activity in HCA, Louise Jackson recently gave a brief talk on the promotions process, at a history subject area meeting. This was excellent - the first time that I have heard anyone speak openly about the subject and in an INFORMED manner. It's a way, finally, to get rid of all the gossip and misinformation which surrounds the process. Even in my last appraisals, I got very conflicting and vague advice on the promotions process, which is unhelpful to say the least and within History SA annual reviews have been carried out consistently this past year for the first time in many years. This is obviously a very positive step. The lack of systematic AR in previous years is indicative of older cultural attitudes. Support for staff on fixed-term contracts might be flagged for future development however, as respondents added that, As a member of staff on a fixed term contract I find the process of promotion/contract renewal very unclear - it has never been explained to me and I do not feel that staff [on fixed-term contracts] are given any support in terms of trying to position themselves as best as possible for future employment. This is both in terms of sufficient time to devote to research and writing outside often quite onerous teaching commitments; and in career shaping advice, notice about opportunities. Cross-tabulation of the dataset by Current Role illustrated a need for greater support at all levels and not just for early career academics. Every group expressed concern regarding career development opportunities and encouragement. The Professor/Reader group agree/strongly agree that, My School provides me with: useful opportunities to act as a mentor (66.7%); useful opportunities to have a mentor (25.0%); useful networking opportunities (66.7%); a useful annual appraisal (100.0%). Corresponding statistics for the Senior Lecturer/Lecturer group were, 50.0%, 55.0%, 70.0% and 55.0%; while Postdoctoral Researcher/Research Assistant/Research Fellowship responses suggested confidence in elements of HCA career development support, with 50.0%, 100.0%, 83.3% and 33.3%, respectively. As 66.7% of the Research group responded Don t know, when asked if they had received a helpful annual appraisal, it can be hypothesised that this group may not have received an annual review in The disparity in response pattern illustrates the need for distinct policies to meet the 4

5 individual requirements of specific career groups within HCA. It also highlights a demand for mentoring and menteeing opportunities amongst mid-career academics, while annual review should be targeted for all career levels. It should also be noted that the Research group comprised only 9.5% of the total response pool (6 individuals) and these percentages are potentially not representative of early-career academics across HCA. Career development opportunities for part-time staff and those working on a flexible basis, is also highlighted as an area for potential action. When asked whether this group enjoy the same opportunities as full-time staff, 71.4% of staff responded Don t know (75.9% of females and 72.0% males), and 14.3% disagreed (6.9% of females and 20.0% of males). Clearer guidelines on career development opportunities for all contractual groups would help to polarise this result. Of the part-time pool itself, 62.5% of staff responded Don t know to this question, and 12.5% disagreed that part-time staff have equal career development opportunities. It should be noted that, 12.7% of the response pool (8 individuals) work on a part-time basis, while 73.0% work full time - normal hours (46 individuals). As only 3.2% of the response pool (2 individuals) currently work on a full time - flexible basis, the self-assessment team may also wish to consider the degree to which flexible working is promoted in the School. Qualitative responses to this section included, PT non-lecturing staff continue to get the same amount of marking and examining as FT colleagues, and express dismay at this lack of fairness. This shows a bias against women I think, and also a hierarchy where lecturers' rights are protected more than those of other kinds of staff. In addition, as far as I know meetings are never scheduled in my division with any regard for the PT staff's availability. I presume this means that they are often giving up an hour of their time unpaid. I feel I should say again that these are all women. Conclusions: - In general, a majority of staff believe that current practices are inclusive and effective, individuals are treated on their merits and work is allocated irrespective of gender. - A majority of staff believe that the School offers useful networking opportunities and a helpful annual review, though there is scope to standardise the annual review schedule and mandate. - A majority of staff agree that meetings take place in viable hours, though there is scope for improvement in the scheduling of School meetings. - Clearer guidelines regarding the work allocation model are required, to enhance transparency and understanding of related practices and processes. - Clearer guidelines on skills and activities recognised by annual review/promotions processes are required. - Greater transparency regarding career development opportunities for all contractual groups. 5

6 - Potential to introduce mentoring programme for staff at all levels, to encourage internal career development and enhance understanding of promotions process. - Potential to improve transparency regarding career development opportunities for staff working on a part-time or flexible basis. - A gender divide is apparent in responses throughout this section, with a higher percentage of negative responses from female staff. 3. LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT Summary: This section assessed staff perceptions of whether HCA has strong management commitment to equality of opportunity in career advancement for both sexes, and sustaining a healthy balance between work and other life obligations and opportunities. In general, staff felt supported by the School, though the Don t know response rate was again high, reflecting the significant number of staff with no personal experience of flexible working practices, family leave or harassment procedures. 60.3% of staff (33.3% Don t know ) and 57.1% of staff (31.7% Don t know ) agreed that the School would deal effectively with requests for flexible working and harassment complaints, respectively. Issues of transparency and understanding were also highlighted in responses to Questions 17 and % of staff (51.7% of females and 32.0% of males) disagree that HCA provides clear information about the University s policies on issues that may relate to gender equality (discrimination, parental leave, flexible work schedules), and 20.6% of staff Don t know. A comprehensive induction programme might help to address this lack of clarity, through effective communication of policies and procedures. A qualitative response to Question 21 added, This information needs to be clear in staff induction booklets - I am relatively new and I should not have to answer 'don't know' to both the questions above. Support for the gender equality initiative is united across genders in HCA and this is unique in CHSS. 61.9% of staff agreed that the department needs to undertake positive action to promote gender equality in opportunity to maintain work-life balance (62.1% of females and 60.0% of males), and 22.2% responded Don t know. 61.9% of staff were also in favour of positive action to promote gender equality in opportunity for career development (62.1% of females and 60.0% of males), and 23.8% responded Don t know. Qualitative responses to Question 21 included, In relation to Qu 18 about positive action. I think positive action needs to be taken to recruit more women into academic roles in History SA. The make up of recruitment panels and scrutiny of job adverts and descriptions needs to be examined. Women in History SA are now treated equally in terms of promotions opportunities once they're in - but very few are recruited in the first place. 70% of history SA is male. Women are more likely to be on fixed term contracts as far as I can make out. Conclusions: - A majority of respondents are unfamiliar with the University s policies, relating to gender equality, flexible working, family leave and harassment. Standard procedures and entitlement should be more effectively communicated, to enhance transparency and understanding. 6

7 - Staff opinion in HCA is united across genders, with a majority of staff in favour of positive action in relation to work-life balance and opportunities for career development. - In general, a majority of staff are satisfied with the support currently received from the School regarding flexible working and harassment; though a significant percentage are unfamiliar with practices and procedures and might benefit from induction/training. 4. REPUTATION AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: Summary: This section assessed whether HCA is perceived as having a record of good reputation and social responsibility in relation to gender equality. 58.7% of staff agreed that the School uses senior men and women as visible role models (58.6% of females and 64.0% of males). Responses to Question 24 were mixed, however. 58.7% of staff agreed that HCA is a great place to work for men and women, though this comprised 48.3% of females and 64.0% of male respondents. As 25.4% of staff disagreed that this was the case (34.5% of females and 20.0% of males), the team may wish to investigate the negative perception of some women and men. Regarding scope for improvement, 30.2% of staff disagree that the School keep employees informed about relevant career advancement and work-life balance matters (34.5% of females and 20.0% of males), with 30.2% responding Don t know (17.2% of females and 48.0% of males). Again, the team might target transparency and understanding, particularly amongst male staff, by promoting a comprehensive induction programme, mentoring and annual review. Qualitative responses to Question 28 include, I feel as a whole there is not enough information given about anything. I am surprised at the reference to staff induction because I am not aware of anyone having undergone such a wonderful thing! There was indeed a mention of an induction session or information at the School Forum but the undercurrent of bemusement that greeted this demonstrated that I am not alone in thinking this. Those to whom it would apply this academic year have already now been in post for 2 months without such a thing happening. This comment is not a specifically gender or diversity related issue, but it does inform the problem of the lack of general awareness of basic information on how the School works, what's expected of us, how to get help. Conclusions: - HCA is active in promoting gender equality through its use of male and female role models, though there is scope for improvement in a School with a majority of male staff. - Female staff are less content than their male counterparts, though a review of the workload model for staff with family and caring responsibilities might help to redress this imbalance. - A majority of staff perceive the School to be a great place to work for all genders, though a significant number of females perceive it to be a better place to work for males. - Potential to improve transparency and flow of information relating to career advancement and work-life balance matters. This issue is relevant to all contractual groups. 7

8 5. MONITORING INFORMATION: Summary: To isolate the views of target groups, through cross-tabulation and filtering, individuals were asked to provide details of subject area, gender, caring responsibilities, role, contractual hours and contract. As this survey targets gender culture in HCA, the team may wish to condense the monitoring information section in subsequent years. Concerns over staff anonymity were expressed throughout the process, though respondents were not expected to provide personal details and BOS access to full response profiles was restricted to the Athena SWAN/GEM Project Officer. As the process of collating the results eliminates the relationship between each answer and the individual who submitted it, the Excel data circulated to the self-assessment team is anonymous. It should be noted that, qualitative responses to particular questions may contain enough detail to compromise anonymity and respondents should be advised of this, either at the start of the survey, or in the comments box itself. While the survey provides a valuable insight into the current cultural climate within HCA, concerns over anonymity make it impossible to calculate the exact representation of specific subject areas, roles and genders within the dataset. 21 members of staff opted not to disclose their subject area (33.3%), 14 members of staff opted not to disclose their role (22.2%) and 9 opted not to disclose their gender (14.3%). Similarly, it was impossible to accurately gauge the impact of caring responsibilities, contractual hours or contract type upon response rate; because 12.7%, 9.5% and 12.7% of staff, respectively, selected Prefer not to say for these questions. If the School opts to circulate the survey on an annual basis, it is hopeful that reassurances of anonymity will alleviate this problem. The alternative of removing the Prefer not to say option is controversial. Regarding subject specific results, 44.4% of respondents were based in History (28); 15.9% in Classics (10); 15.5% in Archaeology (4). Participation rates in each of the subject groups will be monitored as an indicator of progress, though mapping must acknowledge that the number of staff in each department varies. Of the 33.3% of staff (21) who elected not to disclose their subject area, 61.9% (13) agree that the School is a great place to work for women and men. The corresponding statistics for each subject area were; History % agree (13), Classics % agree (7) and Archaeology 100.0% agree (4). Qualitative responses to Question 32 included, The survey is not sufficiently subtle to pick up some of the key areas where gender politics have had an impact. The key area that needs to be considered is academic recruitment practice - the way that posts are identified and described in advertising, along with decisions about membership of appointment boards and This exercise is most timely. The gender equality situation in history at the moment is absolutely dire, in terms of the gender ratio of staff, the opportunities for management roles and other activities which lead to promotion (e.g. sitting on appointment panels), and promotion prospects. It was also noted that, You need to look at the appointments process as well as the other aspects covered here. The university does assume a culture of long-hours working. It's disgraceful that the number of hours worked has been removed from the TAS - which suggests that the university is not interested in work/life balance. Hearsay evidence suggests many academic staff are regularly working 50 hrs a wk. 8