Department: Design, Manufacture & Engineering Management

Transcription

1 Athena SWAN Bronze department award application Name of university: University of Strathclyde Department: Design, Manufacture & Engineering Management Date of application: 30 April Date of university Bronze and/or Silver SWAN award: 2011, renewed in 2014 (April submissions) Contact for application: Mark A. Post Telephone: Departmental website address: Athena SWAN Bronze Department awards recognise that in addition to university-wide policies the department is working to promote gender equality and to address challenges particular to the discipline. Not all institutions use the term department and there are many equivalent academic groupings with different names, sizes and compositions. The definition of a department for SWAN purposes can be found on the Athena SWAN website. If in doubt, contact the Athena SWAN Officer well in advance to check eligibility. It is essential that the contact person for the application is based in the department. Sections to be included At the end of each section state the number of words used. Click here for additional guidance on completing the template. 1. Letter of endorsement from the head of department: maximum 500 words An accompanying letter of endorsement from the head of department should explain how the SWAN action plan and activities in the department contribute to the overall department strategy and academic mission.

2

3 2. The self-assessment process: maximum 1000 words KEY TO ACRONYMS USED THROUGHOUT: DMEM Dept. of Design, Manufacture, and Engineering Management AFRC Advanced Forming Research Centre HR Human Resources SAT Self-Assessment Team WISE Women In Science & Engineering UG Undergraduate PG Postgraduate PGT Postgraduate Taught PGR Postgraduate Research The term Academic Professional staff used throughout this document refers to all academic, research, teaching and knowledge exchange staff combined. All sector averages/benchmarks for staff and student data used throughout this submission come from HESA 2012/13 data as provided by ECU and via the HEIDI data tool. Describe the self-assessment process. This should include: a) A description of the self assessment team: members roles (both within the department and as part of the team) and their experiences of work-life balance. TABLE 1: DMEM SAT MEMBERSHIP NAME POSITION WITHIN DEPT/UNIVERSITY ROLE IN SAT TEAM Prof Alex Duffy Head of Department Senior management support, submission/action plan approval Dr Andrzej Reader, HR Coordinator Co-convenor Rosochowski Dr Mark Post Annie McLaughlin Dr Abigail Hird Lecturer, equality and diversity coordinator University Athena SWAN Officer Research Associate and Faculty WISE Committee member Co-convenor, University level liaison and guidance Student survey, data analysis, WISE Committee liaison Angela Kinlan Dept. Secretary Administrative support, data ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Previous University Vice Dean for Research (Engineering). Past President of the Design Society. Previously served as Ethics coordinator, Co-Director of Centre for Precision Manufacturing. Married to Senior Research Fellow at AFRC. Moved from Canada to the Space Mechatronics Engineering Technology Laboratory in 2014, researcher in space robotics. Co-ordinates Athena SWAN at institutional level, assists depts. in Athena SWAN submissions/actions Faculty WISE (Women in Science & Engineering) Committee member. Supports the Lean Six Sigma program in DMEM.

4 Dr Ian Whitfield Dr Athanasios Rentizelas Drew Irvine Margo Hutchison Gillian Devlin Dr Pamela Anderson Lecturer Lecturer Engineering Technician Supervisor Operations Manager (AFRC) Administrative Assistant (AFRC) Research Associate collation Information on dept. policies, data collation & analysis Survey design, dissemination and analysis Staff data collation and analysis Staff survey dissemination, collation of dept. policy information. Staff data collation and analysis Survey design, dissemination and analysis Kerrie Noble PhD student Student survey design and analysis, student experience input Departmental Research Performance co-ordinator, Systems Engineering researcher. Theme Champion in Engineering Management, and Brazil SWB student co-ordinator. Engineering Technician Supervisor, recently moved to Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering at Strathclyde. Joined DMEM in 2001, Operations Manager, covering finance, HR and general support services, for AFRC, which hosts a 2:1 male to female staff ratio. AFRC Professional support services, and a mother of 3, one of whom has learning difficulties. Received Johnstone and Florence Stoney award from the British Federation of Women Graduates for her PhD research. Recent DMEM graduate, completed MEng degree in Product Design Engineering, July 2014, recipient of IET Grant. b) An account of the self assessment process: details of the self assessment team meetings, including any consultation with staff or individuals outside of the university, and how these have fed into the submission. The DMEM self-assessment team was formed at the beginning of August 2014 and has met approximately every three weeks. The initial meetings were used to set deadlines for analysis of student and staff data, survey design, dissemination and response analysis and to assign these tasks to SAT members. Further meetings focussed on discussion of this analysis and the existing policies and practices within the department. Throughout the process, the SAT identified areas where actions were needed as a result of imbalances identified in staff or student numbers or issues identified from survey results and staff interviews. Potential actions were discussed to address these areas throughout and in the latter stages of the submission process, the action plan was refined and approved by the SAT and shared with the wider department by making the document available as a shared resource and welcoming feedback on the process by . Numerical student and staff data was provided centrally by our Strategy & Policy and Human Resources departments and additional supplemental data (e.g. committee representation) was collated by our departmental administrative team. The SAT team circulated a series of surveys

5 to obtain the opinions and experience of students and staff in the department. Undergraduate students in years 2-5, graduate students, and staff were surveyed separately and survey responses have been referenced throughout this submission to provide rationale for planned actions in our -18 Athena SWAN Action Plan. In addition, the SAT team approached the most long standing female members of the department individually for their personal opinions on the departmental environment and practices and excerpts of their statements have been used throughout this application as an illustration of the experience of female academic and research staff. Survey papers were circulated by and responses tabulated by SAT team members. A total of 67 out of 94 staff responded to the survey. Response rates for our student surveys were as follows: 99 out of 116 second-year students (85%) 43 out of 112 third-year students (38%) 71 out of 80 fourth-year students (89%) 20 out of 25 PGR students (80%) 39 out of 67 PGT students (58%) A combined 69% of students and 71% of staff members in DMEM responded to the survey. A draft of this application was reviewed by the head of department, the Athena SWAN SAT team, and the university Athena SWAN Officer. The Athena SWAN Officer is registered as an Athena SWAN application assessment panellist and has sat on two panels, helping to assess Athena SWAN applications from a range of departments and institutions. This experience assisted the SAT in understanding the depth and level of reflection and analysis required for the submission and in understanding how to effectively present our evidence. c) Plans for the future of the self assessment team, such as how often the team will continue to meet, any reporting mechanisms and in particular how the self assessment team intends to monitor implementation of the action plan. The SAT team will continue to convene every two months to ensure that actions identified are implemented, monitor success in meeting any new targets identified as success measures in our action plan and continue to promote equality and diversity practices within the department. After two years, the SAT membership will be refreshed so that a range of staff and students within the department can contribute. It will be a priority to ensure gender balance is maintained in the membership. Also, the SAT will serve as a contact and mediation point for gender equity issues within the department in general and the HoD will communicate this function via regular departmental s and at departmental meetings. Athena SWAN will be a standing item at departmental monthly meetings, where progress will be reported and any potential new areas for further action not already identified in our action plan will be discussed. The SAT will provide an annual report to the HoD, outlining progress made against each of our action points and identifying any new actions. The SAT will liaise closely with the Athena SWAN Officer and Equality & Diversity Manager during the introduction of the new, extended Athena SWAN charter in /16. We will particularly reflect on the inclusion of non academic and research staff categories and the interplay of protected characteristics other than gender. This is particularly to ensure that any future revisions to our action plan take these elements into consideration, in preparation for any of our future applications under the new version of the charter.

6 ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION 4.2 Embed role of Athena SWAN SAT in Department Management and Culture 3. A picture of the department: maximum 2000 words a) Provide a pen-picture of the department to set the context for the application, outlining in particular any significant and relevant features. The award winning and internationally leading Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management (DMEM) is focused on Delivering Total Engineering through research excellence, effective industrial collaboration and innovative engineering education. Undergraduate courses are offered in Production Engineering and Management, Product Design and Innovation, Product Design Engineering, and Sports Engineering. DMEM hosts a number of world leading research centres and clusters, and has also recently moved back into the completely renovated James Weir building, which provides improved student working and leisure spaces, expanded staff facilities, and cutting-edge technological features for teaching, networking, and presentation of design work. Women are typically very active and well represented within our student and academic staff population. We have 687 students overall (33% female) and 94 Academic Professional staff (29% female). Our female Academic Professional staff percentage is thus significantly higher than the national benchmark average for General Engineering of 19.9% and the average for Mechanical, Aaero & Production Engineering (the closest available comparable HESA subject category) of 16.1%. Our undergraduate female population of 36% is also significantly higher than the HESA benchmark for production and manufacture engineering of 17%. Our highest percentage of female staff relative to male are at Senior Lecturer level (80%, four out of five of our senior lecturers are women) although we recognise that there is a lack of women at Professor level. Our development and recruitment actions described in our -18 action plan are intended to redress this imbalance and strengthen the pipeline of women in our department from undergraduate through to professor level. One issue apparent from our staff recruitment data is the relatively low percentage of female applications to Academic Professional posts. While we are aware that this is partly dependent on a national (and international) pool of female applicants, we are nonetheless committed to increasing our share of this pool and attracting more applications from women We have already begun to take some action on this, with one example being that three of DMEM s Advanced Forming Research Centre (AFRC) meeting rooms were named after female members of staff, recognising not only their contribution to Engineering at Strathclyde but raising the profile of women academics among staff and external visitors. While we are heartened that our female academic professional and female undergraduate populations are significantly above national averages as reported in HESA data, we are aware that this still leaves significant room for improvement in our gender balance in our staff and student populations. We have recognised the need to address this in our action plan.

7 b) Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance and how they have affected action planning. Student data (i) Numbers of males and females on access or foundation courses comment on the data and describe any initiatives taken to attract women to the courses. DMEM does not currently offer access or foundation courses. The University as a whole is currently reviewing student provision/recruitment through foundation courses and DMEM will actively engage with any policy introduced in this regard. At University level, there are ring-fenced places for girls on the Engineering Accelerate Summer programmes run by our Widening Access Team. Accelerate is a one-week programme for pupils at the end of S4, S5 and S6 who are thinking about going to University. It aims to provide a targeted focus on the pupils chosen area of academic interest, giving them a head start on the road to their chosen career and has a focus on widening access to higher education. We will engage with the Widening Access Team to ensure that the department is well promoted to female students on the Accelerate programme and to provide female role models for pupils taking part. (ii) Undergraduate male and female numbers full and part-time comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the impact to date. Comment upon any plans for the future. There were only 8 part time students in 2014/15 (4 female and 4 male). TABLE2: DMEM FT & PT Undergraduate population by gender (averages are for Production & Manufacture Engineering HESA subject area) Academic Year Gender Strathclyde DMEM UK HESA Average Scotland HESA Average F 188 (36%) n/a n/a M 333 (64%) n/a n/a F 161(33%) n/a n/a M 332 (67%) n/a n/a F 118(31%) 17% 26% M 259 (69%) 83% 74% Diagram1: DMEM Female undergraduate population compared to the sector average

8 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% DMEM Female UG% vs benchmark 36% 33% 31% 17% 26% UK Average Scotland Average Our proportion of female undergraduates is significantly above both Scottish and UK averages. We have also seen a year on year increase in the female percentage of students since 2012, reaching a high of 36% this year, an encouraging trend which we in part ascribe to our continued efforts to provide positive female role models and examples to our applicants at our important undergraduate conversion and recruitment events. We aspire to attract candidates of the highest calibre, regardless of gender, and as a department we put great effort into open days and interview sessions for visiting UCAS applicants. As an Engineering department we are aware that we are at risk of attracting a lower percentage of female than male applicants due to persisting social and cultural assumptions and educational trends. Therefore, an important part of our undergraduate recruitment strategy has been ensuring that female staff and students always participate and represent the department during open days, student visits and interview sessions so that female students are not dissuaded from applying to and registering at Strathclyde due to a lack of positive role models of their own gender. We have actively recruited current female students in the department to network with female applicants during student visits and open days and to participate in brainstorming exercises with them during our applicant interview sessions in order to give applicants first hand opinions and experience of life as a female student in the department. We will continue this practice while reviewing our internet and print marketing materials to ensure prominent positive female role models). We will also continue to monitor our undergraduate population by gender regularly to ensure these tactics are effective and our higher than average female ratio is maintained or strengthened. (iii) Postgraduate male and female numbers completing taught courses full and part-time comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future. There were 24 part time students in 2014/15 (7 female, 29%).

9 Table3: DMEM FT & PT Postgraduate taught population by gender (average benchmarks are for Production & Manufacturing Engineering) Academic Year Gender Strathclyde DMEM UK Average Scotland Average F 27 (28%) n/a n/a M 71 (72%) n/a n/a F 52(31%) n/a n/a M 117(69%) n/a n/a F 32(34%) 24% 33% M 63(66%) 76% 67% Diagram 2: Female postgraduate taught (PGT) population compared to the sector average 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% DMEM Female PG% vs benchmark 28% 31% 34% 24% 33% UK Average Scotland Average We currently run 10 PGT degrees covering a range of Engineering design, manufacturing, product engineering, mechatronics, and operations management areas. Our PGT female ratio is above the UK average of 24% but slightly under the Scottish average (2012/13) of 33%. The percentage of female students on PGT degrees has decreased slightly, over the last three years. We will continue to monitor the PGT population by gender to ensure our higher than UK average ratio is maintained or strengthened, but we have also included specific actions aimed at attracting postgraduate female students in our action plan. (iv) Postgraduate male and female numbers on research degrees full and part-time comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future. There were 9 part time PGR students in 2014/15 (3 female, 33%). Table 4: DMEM FT &PT Postgraduate research population by gender (average benchmarks are for Production & Manufacturing Engineering) Academic Year Gender Strathclyde DMEM UK Average Scotland Average

10 F 13 (19%) n/a n/a M 55 (81%) n/a n/a F 19(26%) n/a n/a M 55(74%) n/a n/a F 14(26%) 24% 25% M 41(74%) 76% 75% Diagram 3: Female postgraduate research (PGR) population compared to the sector average 30% 25% 20% DMEM Female PGR % vs benchmark 26% 26% 24% 25% 19% 15% 10% 5% 0% UK Average Scotland Average Our percentage of female PGR students was in line with the UK and Scottish averages from but has fallen below this in 2014/15 as the number of female PGR students has reduced, while the number of males has remained static. While it is difficult to suggest a trend from one year s data, we will continue to monitor the population by gender as well as begin to instigate the actions described in our action plan which are designed to promote PGR degrees to our current female students as well as external applicants. On reviewing our PGR data, the SAT decided that we could begin to take action in this regard immediately. While the department currently welcomes research proposals throughout the year, the SAT, in cooperation with the Head of Department, has asked academics to begin to specifically target well qualified female applicants who may be known to them from both inside and outside the department. We will also aim to increase awareness of part-time study options available to our PGR population ensuring applicants are fully aware of all options available to them lest they be dissuaded from undertaking PGR study due to family or other existing commitments. (v) Ratio of course applications to offers and acceptances by gender for undergraduate, postgraduate taught and postgraduate research degrees comment on the differences between male and female application and success rates and describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and their effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.

11 Table 5: UG Student applications and conversion (ratios of offers to applications, acceptances to offers, and acceptances to applications). Academic Gender Number (gender ratio) Ratios Year Appl Offers Accept Offers /App Accept /Offer Accept /App F % 48% 39% (27%) (29%) (38%) M % 32% 23% (73%) (71%) (62%) F % 52% 45% (30%) (32%) (36%) M % 44% 35% (70%) (68%) (64% F % 48% 34% (30%) M 300 (70%) (34%) 178 (66%) (33%) 88 (67%) 59% 49% 29% The female rate of applications is fairly consistent, with only a slight fall this year from 30% to 27%. The percentage of offers given to female applicants is consistently significantly higher than that for males. While the offer to application ratio has improved for both female and male students over the three year period, females remain more likely than males to be successful in their application and since 2013 have been more likely to accept their offer. Our future actions have therefore been focussed on improving the application rate from female applicants via outreach to schools and colleges and activities at open day events. In the undergraduate student survey, 82% of women and 86% of men agreed that engagement with academic staff in the department is encouraged. Also, 84% of women and 81% of men agreed were suitable opportunities for social contact with other students. We will continue to monitor undergraduate recruitment and are working with the faculty to school liaison actions that will allow us to raise the profile of our department and its women to potential applicants so as to improve female applicant numbers. Table 6: PGT Student applications and conversion (ratios of offers to applications, acceptances to offers, and acceptances to applications). Academic Gender Number (gender ratio) Ratios Year Appl Offers Accept Offers /Appl Accept /Offer Accept /Appl F % 15% 14% (28%) (28%) (27%) M % 16% 15% (72%) (72%) (73%) F % 12% 12% (27%) (27%) (26%) M % 14% 13% (73%) (73%) (74%) F % 7% 5% (32%) (32%) (30%) M % 8% 5%

12 (68%) (68%) (70%) The percentage of applications from female students has dropped slightly from 32% to 28% since There is a high offer to application ratio for both female and male students, with both groups generally equally likely to receive an offer. Women are very slightly less likely to accept an offer than men. As referred to in Section 3(b)(iii), we have developed specific actions aimed at attracting female PGT applications as this is where the imbalance lies, rather than in application success rates or conversion. Table 7: PGR Student applications and conversion (ratios of offers to applications, acceptances to offers, and acceptances to applications). Academic Gender Number (gender ratio) Ratios Year Appl Offers Accept Offers /Appl Accept /Offer Accept /Appl F % 11% 8% (20%) (19%) (12%) M % 19% 16% (80%) (81%) (88%) F % 54% 50% (17%) (18%) (25%) M % 36% 31% (83%) (82%) (75%) F % 18% 18% (15%) (15%) (9%) M 64 (85%) 61 (85%) 20 (91%) 95% 33% 31% The percentage of applications from female students has risen from 15% to 20% since While 100% of female applicants received offers in 2012, this dropped slightly in 2013 and in the success rate was 75%, dropping below the male success rate for the first time since As noted in our action plan, the success rate of female applicants will be monitored and action instigated if it falls or does not improve. As specified in Section 3(b)(iv), we will implement actions designed to improve the rate of female PGR applications, including enhanced promotion of our PGR degrees to current students and external applicants, targeting of individual female applicants and enhanced promotion of part time PGR study. (vi) Degree classification by gender comment on any differences in degree attainment between males and females and describe what actions are being taken to address any imbalance. Table 8: DMEM UG degree classifications by gender Strathclyde DMEM numbers (ratio of sub total) Academic Gender 1 st Class Upper Lower 3 rd Class Ordinary Sub total Year Hon 2 nd Class Hon 2 nd Class Hon Hon F 6(28%) 14(67%) 1(5%) M 7(14%) 35(68%) 6(12%) 0 3(6%) F 9(50%) 5(28%) 3(17%) 0 1(5%) 18 M 8(19%) 26(62%) 7(17%) 0 1(2%) 42

13 F 3(27%) 6(55%) 2(18%) M 5(15%) 14(41%) 13(38%) 0 2(6%) 34 In the past three years, female students have obtained a considerably higher percentage of first class degrees than male students. The table below shows the percentages of female and male students obtaining either a first class or upper second degree since Women have performed significantly better than men in this regard in two out of three years. Table 9: Percentage of Female and Male students achieving 1 st /Upper 2 nd Degrees Academic Year Gender 1 st Class/Upper 2 nd Class Hon F 20 (95%) M 42 (82%) F 14 (78%) M 34 (81%) F 9 (82%) M 19 (56%) Table 10: UK Average Student degree classifications by gender (HESA data for Production & Manufacture Engineering) UK Average Ratio Academic Year Gender 1 st Class Hon Upper 2 nd Class Hon Lower 2 nd Class Hon 3 rd Class Hon Ordinary F n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a M n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a F 28% 40% 21% 4% n/a M 19% 43% 22% 8% n/a F 19% 49% 22% 5% n/a M 18% 43% 24% 5% n/a For the representative years, female students in DMEM can be seen to perform significantly better than the national averages. We will continue to monitor degree classifications by gender as part of our action plan in order to identify any trends and areas for concern in the performance of female or male students. ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION 1.1 Monitor UG, PGT and PGR student data (population, intake, applications, offers, classification, etc.) by gender, benchmarking against national averages 1.3 Monitor UG, PGT and PGR student satisfaction through surveys 2.1 Continue to recruit current female students to network with female applicants during student visits, open days and applicant interview sessions 2.2 Review web based and print marketing materials and applicant communications to ensure positive female role models are prominent 2.3 Develop comprehensive and systematic school liaison actions that will allow us to raise the profile of our department to female and male school pupils, including events at all girls schools 2.4 Enhance promotion of PGT degrees to current female and male UG students 2.5 Enhance promotion of PGR degrees in DMEM to our current female students

14 as well as external applicants 3.4 Provide networking opportunities for female staff and PGR students Staff data (vii) Female:male ratio of academic staff and research staff researcher, lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, professor (or equivalent). Comment on any differences in numbers between males and females and say what action is being taken to address any underrepresentation at particular grades/levels Table 11: University of Strathclyde Academic Professional Career Pathways Grade Academic Research Teaching Knowledge Exchange n/a Professor n/a n/a n/a Grade 10 Reader Principal Research Fellow Principal Teaching Fellow Principal Knowledge Exchange Fellow Grade 9 Senior Lecturer Senior Research Fellow Senior Teaching Fellow Senior Knowledge Exchange Fellow Grade 8 Lecturer B Research Fellow Teaching Fellow Knowledge Exchange Fellow Grade 7 Lecturer A Research Associate Teaching Associate Knowledge Exchange Associate Grade 6 n/a Research Assistant Teaching Assistant Knowledge Exchange Assistant The percentage of female staff in 2014 (29%) compares very favourably to the UK average for Mechanical, aero & production engineering overall (16.1%) and by staff category (Academic, Research and Teaching). The department has experienced a slight rise in the percentage of female Academic Professional staff members over a three year period. Table 12: DMEM Academic professional staff numbers by category and gender ratio

15 Year Gender Academic Research & KE Teaching Total Oct 2014 F 3(17%) 23(32%) 1(20%) 27(29%) M 15(83%) 48(68%) 4(80%) 67(71%) Oct 2013 F 3(15%) 15(31%) 1(20%) 19(26%) M 17(85%) 33(69%) 4(80%) 54(74%) Oct 2012 F 3(15%) 13(25%) 2(40%) 18(27%) M 17(85%) 29(75%) 3(60%) 49(73%) Table 13: Latest subject benchmark data (HESA UK average) for academic, research and teaching staff population gender ratio Year Gender Academic Research & KE Teaching 2012 F 13% 22% 15% M 87% 78% 85% Table 14: DMEM Academic professional staff numbers by staff grade and gender ratio Staff Grade Year Female Male Female % Male % Professor % 100% % 100% % 100% Reader/Grade 10 Equivalent % 100% % 100% % 100% Senior Lecturer/Grade 9 Equivalent % 43% % 20% % 50% Lecturer B/Grade 8 Equivalent % 85% % 90% % 75% Lecturer A/Grade 7 Equivalent % 79% % 75% % 75% Teaching Assistant/Grade 6 Equivalent % 53% % 65% % 61% Off Scale Researcher % 40% % 67% % 0% All Academic Professional Staff % 71% % 74% % 73% While we are pleased that we have recruited women at rates significantly above the national averages for comparable subject areas, we are disappointed that we have had no female professors or readers in the department over the period analysed. While overall staff numbers at these levels are relatively small, we have identified a need to tackle the progression and recruitment of women into these grades. In particular, we are aware that we have a positive

16 female gender balance at Senior Lecturer level. Our actions in this area will include looking at the possible progression potential for our existing female Senior Lecturers and grade 9 equivalent staff. Our overall percentage of female Grade 7 and 8 lecturers and researchers is 20%. We will also seek to increase female recruitment into these grades, to build a stronger pipeline for women s progression into more senior levels and to boost the female population in DMEM overall. (viii) Turnover by grade and gender comment on any differences between men and women in turnover and say what is being done to address this. Where the number of staff leaving is small, comment on the reasons why particular individuals left. 26% of staff turnover since 2011 has been female, which is slightly below the overall female percentage of staff. Of 6 departures in , 0 were female; of 12 in , 5 were female and of 5 in , 1 was female. All of the female departures were at Grade 6 or 7 (3 each) while of the male departures, 3 were Grade 6, 10 were Grade 7, 2 were Grade 8, 2 were Grade 9 and 3 were Professors. We will continue to monitor turnover as part of our action plan and seek to encourage staff to complete the Human Resources exit survey if they choose to leave the University. ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION Monitor staff data (population, applications, offers, appointments, turnover, promotions) by gender and grade, benchmarking against national averages Monitor staff satisfaction through surveys Enhance staff recruitment tactics to ensure posts are attractive to both female and male applicants

17 4. Supporting and advancing women s careers: maximum 5000 words Key career transition points a) Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance and how they have affected action planning. (i) Job application and success rates by gender and grade comment on any differences in recruitment between men and women at any level and say what action is being taken to address this. Table 15: Academic professional staff job application/appointment numbers by category and gender ratio Applicants Appointments Category Year Female Male Total Female Male Total Academic (18%) 14(82%) 17 0(0%) 2(100%) (5%) 75(95%) 79 0(0%) 2(100%) (0%) 7(100%) 7 0(0%) 2(100%) 2 Research &KE (20%) 258(80%) (35%) 26(65%) (14%) 171(86%) 199 9(31%) 20(69%) (14%) 115(86%) (39%) 16(61%) 26 Teaching (100%) 0(0%) 1 By far the largest numbers of applications and appointments to posts over the past three years has been within the Research & Knowledge Exchange category. While women have represented between 14% and 20% of applicants, they have been appointed to between 31% and 39% of posts in this category. There has been a much lower rate of appointment to academic posts, with only two academic appointments made each year since , all of which have been male. Only 7 women have applied for academic posts from , compared to 103 men. DMEM does not appoint many teaching staff, but the single teaching appointment in was to a woman. Table 16: Academic professional staff job application/appointment numbers by grade and gender ratio Applicants Appointments Grade Year Female Male Total Female Male Total PROF (4%) 22(96%) 23 0(0%) 1(100%) Grade (18%) 14(82%) Grade (13%) 7(87%) 8 0(0%) 2(100%)

18 (0%) 7(100%) Grade (21%) 65(79%) 82 1(33%) 2(67%) (8%) 55(92%) 60 0(0%) 2(100%) (8%) 12(92%) 13 1(25%) 3(75%) 4 Grade (17%) 105(83%) 127 4(20%) 16(80%) (13%) 93(87%) 107 3(23%) 10(77%) (11%) 60(89%) 67 4(40%) 6(60%) 10 Grade (22%) 43(78%) 55 7(50%) 7(50%) (15%) 64(85%) 75 5(46%) 6(54%) (20%) 43(80%) 54 6(43%) 8(57%) 14 TOTAL (19%) 234 (81%) (31%) 27 (69%) (12%) 234 (88%) (30%) 19 (70%) (13%) 122 (87%) (39%) 17 (61%) 28 Diagram 4: Total Applicants and Appointments by gender % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 88% 87% 81% 69% 70% 61% 39% 31% 30% 19% 12% 13% Female Applicants Male Applicants Female Appointments Male Appointments Overall, women s success rate has significantly outstripped the female percentage of applications to all posts over the three year period. Women have represented between 12-19% of applications, but between 30-39% of appointments. The highest numbers of appointments have been made at Grades 6 and 7. From , women represented 18% of applications at Grade 6 and 46% of appointments and at Grade 7, 14% of applications and 34% of appointments. Our current recruitment processes are described in Section 3 (b)(i) below. The positive success rate of women applying for posts does not suggest a bias against female candidates and as such we have mainly targeted our actions in this area around initiatives to attract more women to apply to the department. However, we have also committed to ensuring that our recruitment panel chairs undertake the University s training on unconscious bias.

19 ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION Monitor staff data (population, applications, offers, appointments, turnover, promotions) by gender and grade, benchmarking against national averages Review web based and print marketing materials and applicant communications to ensure positive female role models are prominent Enhance staff recruitment tactics to ensure posts are attractive to both female and male applicants Ensure equality training for all staff and guard against unconscious bias (ii) Applications for promotion and success rates by gender and grade comment on whether these differ for men and women and if they do explain what action may be taken. Where the number of women is small applicants may comment on specific examples of where women have been through the promotion process. Explain how potential candidates are identified. Since , 7 women and 15 men have gained promotion. The female percentage of promotions is therefore 32% compared to an overall female population in the department of 29%. Candidates for promotion are identified by staff or line managers (PI for research staff, HoD for academic staff) approaching the HoD to make the case for promotion, or through the Accountability and Development Review (ADR) process which also supports staff development towards promotion. In the staff survey, 82% of women and 88% of men agreed that the members of staff who have conducted their ADR treated them fairly, and 81% of women and 85% of men believed that they had been treated fairly overall with respect to promotion. However, only 18% of women and 27% of men stated that staff are encouraged to apply for promotion, with 45% of women and 39% of men neither agreeing nor disagreeing. This indicates that encouragement, support and guidance for promotion should be a priority in the department and is listed in our action plan. ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION Raise awareness of career development opportunities, leadership training and mentoring among female staff Clarify and disseminate criteria for staff p romotion process, targeting potential candidates (including our strong female Senior Lecturer population)

20 b) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed. (i) Recruitment of staff comment on how the department s recruitment processes ensure that female candidates are attracted to apply, and how the department ensures its short listing, selection processes and criteria comply with the university s equal opportunities policies. Departmental recruitment panel Chairs are required to complete the University Recruitment and Selection training module on Equality and Diversity. We have also committed to the University-wide training program on Unconscious Bias. HR manages the staff recruitment process and ensures equal opportunity at all stages of the process. Shortlisting and selection is done on a merit basis according to pre-established essential and desirable criteria. All written documentation, including the individual feedback and comments of panel members and reasons for unsuccessful applications, is cross-checked and recorded by HR. We strive to make panels gender-balanced and as part of our action plan, we will ensure that female representation on the interview panel is always assured by requesting, if necessary, the presence of external female staff members. All advertisements for staff positions clearly state the University s equal employment opportunity policy and show the Athena SWAN logo. As per the HR Good Practice in Recruitment guide, adverts are drafted so as to avoid any language which may be considered discriminatory and panel members are instructed on how to avoid inadvertent bias in interview process and questioning (including with regard to gender and pregnancy/maternity). We will also conduct a comprehensive review of our departmental webpages to ensure visibility of female students, alumni and staff and highlight their achievements, as well as reflecting our supportive and family-friendly policies as we are aware that potential applicants will refer to our departmental site when researching the department. We also plan more targeted advertising to highlight our vacancies to female candidates, such as via the WISE (Women into Science & Engineering) vacancy web portal. To aid increased recruitment and progression of women, the department will create a list of prizes and fellowship opportunities specifically aimed towards women and publicise these on our website. We will also ensure that staff applying for these have access to advice and support in their applications from more senior members of the department and their peers. Overall, our female application numbers have risen from 19 in to 55 in (from 13% to 19% of all applications), with female success ratios being much higher than their male counterparts, as discussed above. ACTION NUMBER 1.2 ACTION DESCRIPTION Monitor staff data (population, applications, offers,appointments, turnover, promotions) by gender and grade, benchmarking against national averages

21 Review web based and print marketing materials and applicant communications to ensure positive female role models are prominent Enhance staff recruitment tactics to ensure posts are attractive to both female & male applicants Ensure equality training for all staff and guard against unconscious bias (ii) Support for staff at key career transition points having identified key areas of attrition of female staff in the department, comment on any interventions, programmes and activities that support women at the crucial stages, such as personal development training, opportunities for networking, mentoring programmes and leadership training. Identify which have been found to work best at the different career stages. Women represent 25% of staff at Grades 7 and 8 combined and 57% of staff at Grade 9 (Senior Lecturer level). There are no women at Reader or Professor Level (overall staff populations of 2 and 6 respectively). The data makes it difficult to identify a specific attrition point, but it is clear that the department needs to work in three key areas to build the pipeline of academic professional women: (a) recruit more women to the department at Grades 7 and 8 and overall, (b) ensure that women at Grades 7 and 8 are retained and developed within the department and (c) ensure that we capitalise on the high percentage of women at Grade 9 by assessing and developing their potential for promotion into Reader and Professor grades. The staff survey indicated that only 50% of women and 60% of men agreed that they were satisfied with their career progression, and 36% of women were undecided compared to 15% of men. This is combined with the indications of low encouragement to apply for promotion stated in 4. a) (ii) We actively encourage all staff to undertake a range of training, development and coaching schemes as discussed below. We plan to review our promotion of these opportunities to ensure that all staff are regularly reminded to participate, regardless of their length of service within the department. University Level The Strathclyde Programme in Research and Leadership (SPIRAL), run by HR s Organisational and Staff Development Unit (OSDU), offers a wide range of training, professional development, networking opportunities and coaching services, including Masterclass sessions targeted at academic leaders to ensure best-practice dissemination. Strathclyde is the University's mentoring programme to support staff with their career development. While we promote the mentoring programme to all of our staff, we are aware that there is a shortage of female Science & Engineering mentors signed up to the programme, which may discourage female potential mentees from these subject areas. We will ensure that we also encourage our female senior lecturers to explore signing up as mentors to more junior staff within our department. Department and Faculty Level

22 Abigail Hird, SAT member and Research Associate in DMEM, is a member of the Faculty Committee, WISE@Strath which aims to support career development for women within engineering at Strathclyde organising events and promoting staff-student networks. Past initiatives have included the facilitation of cross departmental collaboration between women and joint research and funding applications. We plan to encourage as many women as possible to participate in these activities by undertaking enhanced promotion of WISE@Strath to women in our department. While a formal mentoring scheme exists for new probationary staff, no formal scheme currently exists for non-probationary staff. The Department is committed to improving mentoring and career development coaching, and will seek to learn and implement best practice from other departments within the Faculty, and provide support for mentoring at all levels of academic development to ensure all staff have access to the information they need to succeed. Our staff survey revealed that 57% of women and 51% of men agreed that mentoring activities are given consideration in their overall workload, with 40% of women and 47% of men undecided. While the Department will continue to support all activities described above and ensure we are actively promoting them to all staff, we will also commit to ensuring that these activities are consistently taken into account in workload calculation for the department. This year, the department co-funded a member of staff (assisted by central university funds) to undertake the LFHE s Aurora women s leadership development programme. We will work with the participant after she completes the programme to assess how learning from the programme might be applied more generally across the department to support women s development. We have also committed to continuing to co-fund Aurora participants in future years. ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION Raise awareness of career development opportunities, leadership training and mentoring among female staff Provide networking opportunities for female staff and PGR students Career development a) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed. (i) Promotion and career development comment on the appraisal and career development process, and promotion criteria and whether these take into consideration responsibilities for teaching, research, administration, pastoral work and outreach work; is quality of work emphasised over quantity of work? The University s Accountability and Development Review (ADR) process is a comprehensive personal career development process completed annually by all staff. In consultation with a formally appointed reviewer, individual staff members set their objectives for the coming 12- month period. These are reviewed and appraised at the following year s ADR meeting. Reviewers are rotated as management roles change; however, Department policy is to seek

23 consistency across appraisals to ensure a detailed understanding of individual circumstances. The ADR is designed to encourage and enable staff to identify areas for development, assisting them in furthering their careers. Probationary staff conduct an additional annual review with their Mentors and HoD to demonstrate satisfactory progress and plan for achievement of probationary requirements. Both processes are compulsory. The probation period for new academic staff is three years, during which the probationer is expected to make satisfactory progress in research, teaching, knowledge exchange and citizenship activities (including outreach). Mentoring support and workload management are overseen by the HoD to ensure this process is staged progressively over the three-year period and to avoid excessive demands on new staff members. Particularly, teaching and administration duties are increased incrementally, to enable new staff to establish their research activity during the critical post-arrival period. Regular Mentor meetings support this process, and collegiality is encouraged to involve probationary staff in Departmental decisionmaking. Staff wishing to be considered for promotion may identify themselves during the ADR process or by direct communication with their line manager/hod. The candidate and HoD can consult with a panel of senior staff, who provide supporting feedback and decide together whether to submit a case for promotion or to defer until the case is strengthened. The HoD prepares a support statement for submission to the promotion panel. If the candidate or HoD do not reach a consensus, the individual may submit the case without departmental support. Submitted promotion cases are first considered by a Faculty Panel and, if successful, subsequently by a University Panel. The staff survey indicated that, while 100% of women and 98% of men felt their recruitment had been fair and 81% of women and 85% of men believed they had been treated fairly in their ADR process, only 27% of women and 30% of men believed that the ADR process was useful to their career development. We aim to not only encourage application for promotion, but implement a mechanism for identifying prospective applicants, helping them by identifying their strengths and weaknesses, and assisting them to plan for creating a strong case for promotion. ACTION NUMBER ACTION DESCRIPTION Clarify and disseminate criteria for staff promotion process, targeting potential candidates (including our female strong Senior Lecturer population) Allocation of citizenship activities made more transparent and accountable in workloads, and ADR reviewers will also encourage reviewees to discuss their workloads and follow up on any imbalances with the appropriate Director or with the Head of Department (ii) Induction and training describe the support provided to new staff at all levels, as well as details of any gender equality training. To what extent are good employment practices in the institution, such as opportunities for networking, the flexible working policy, and professional and personal development opportunities promoted to staff from the outset?