Research and Development Support Office

Transcription

1 Equalities Impact Assessment Research and Development Support Office Recruitment of Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) Associates A. Policy/practice details 1. Title of Policy/Practice (of policy/practice etc being assessed) Recruitment of Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) Associates 2. What is the aim, objective or purpose of the policy, procedure, service or function? Explain the main purpose of the policy/practice being assessed/changed. To recruit suitably qualified and experienced people to manage and deliver KTPs. 3. Who are the main stakeholders? Detail clearly what methods you used to gather the information you needed to assist in making a decision on the impact of the policy, procedure, service or function on the main stakeholders affected by the policy/practice (staff/students/visitors/customers). In the case of disabled people it is a legal requirement to actively involve and consult them. The main stakeholders are current and recent University of Bath students and external job seekers. I used a database which I developed and keep particularly for the purpose of monitoring applications for KTP vacancies. This is outside the University s recruitment databases as it allows me to regularly monitor applications for possible bias. I used the HESA website ( to benchmark our application statistics against national figures for participation in particular subject areas, and the statistics relating to participation rates of black and minority ethnic students and disabled students. I used the KTP Annual report 2009 for national KTP statistics. I used information provided by the MIS section of Human Resources which gave me the breakdown of applications received from women, people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds and those declaring a disability. 4. Aspects of the policy that particularly impact on equality and diversity In the context of the policy/practice, give quantitative data on the numbers of those affected in the last year and the amount of money used to carry out the practice. Are there any areas of the policy, procedure, service or function that are governed by discretionary powers or judgement? Any summary qualitative data should be quoted here too. In the last year, 370 applications were received for advertised KTP vacancies. Using my own database and using the title Miss / Mrs / Ms as a proxy for assuming the applicant was female I noted 23 (6%) of these applications were from women. I 1

2 was unable to ascertain the race or disability status of applications based on the application form (minus the EO questionnaire) supplied to me. The figures supplied by MIS in HR regarding the gender, race and disability status of applicants for KTP positions in the academic year 2008/09 were; Female 6% Male 55% Undisclosed 39% Any other white background 5% Asian or Asian British 31% Black or Black British 6% Chinese or other ethnic group 12% Mixed 2% Undisclosed 39% White British 4% No declared disability 58% Undisclosed 41% Declared disability 1% The selection procedure for recruitment (including shortlisting for interview and the interview process) is governed by judgement. B. Analysis 5. Data used (List the data used in the collation of evidence.) In the last year, seven KTP Associates have been recruited. Of these, two were women. Of the seven recruits, three were non-eu nationals. Of the seven recruits, three are from black and minority ethnic categories. None of the recruits has disclosed a disability. Whilst this appears to suggest a strong gender bias, it has to be analysed in light of the gender split of those gaining degrees in the subject specialism for which we were recruiting. Five of the vacancies were engineering projects (mechanical / electrical / manufacturing / design), one was a biochemistry project, one was a chemistry / pharmaceutical science project. Using the HESA statistics for 2007/08 (the most recent on the website), I was able to establish the following: The gender split for engineering is 15% female 85% male; The gender split for biology and associated degree subjects is 64% female and 36% male; The gender split for chemistry and related subjects is 42% female and 58% male. Two of the five engineering positions that were advertised were filled by women; which leads me to believe that whilst our selection procedure appears to be gender neutral, perhaps our advertising needs to be looked at more closely as only 6% of applicants were female. Nationally the percentage of female KTP Associates who were female as at March 2009 was 31% (KTP Annual Report 2009). The Annual Report states that number of non-uk registered Associates was 43%, although this is not disaggregated by race and therefore does not indicate the ethnic background of Associates. However, the split by country of origin is China 7%, India / Pakistan 9%, Malaysia 2%, Sri Lanka 1%, Nigeria 1%, Iran 1%, other Asia 3%, other Africa 2%. 2

3 With regards to disability; HESA statistics show that 7% of the student population report a disability. To my knowledge, none of our current Associate cohort has a disability and only two of the 370 applicants for KTP positions disclosed a disability. Due to time / resource constraints, it was not possible to look into this further at this moment. However, in the past I have refused to advertise vacancies from other establishments that I felt contravened the Disability Discrimination Act, in particular, if they asked for a clean driving licence as part of the personal specification. I returned such advertisements to the establishment concerned, explaining why the University was unable to advertise a vacancy that excluded people with disabilities and alerted the whole KTP community to this (via a JISC list ). Generally, to eliminate bias in the shortlisting process, I ensure that those who are making the decisions as to who to choose for interview use a shortlisting grid and score the applicants only against the qualifications, skills and competencies advertised. I ensure that the candidates are placed in no particular order on the grid and tell the shortlisting panel that this is what I have done. 6. Assessment of adverse impact (What consultation was carried out as part of the EIA and with which groups? Describe in greater detail by equality strand how each group might be adversely affected by the practice being assessed where appropriate- relates to the areas of listed in the space above ideally not more than 300 words in this section.) Gender Historically women have been well represented in our KTP Associate cohort, despite the subject areas we were recruiting in. For example, of the fifteen projects we are running at present, five are populated by women. This had led me to believe that gender inequality was not an issue in KTP recruitment. However, this EIA has highlighted that women appear not to be applying for KTP vacancies in the numbers they should be. Action therefore needs to be taken on this. Race The HESA statistics state that 17% of the student population is from a black or minority ethnic background. Our recruitment statistics and an analysis of our current KTP Associate cohort appear to show that our recruitment and selection process does not produce an adverse impact in terms of race. Of our current fifteen Associates, six have a black or minority ethic background, which equates to 40% of the cohort. Disability - This is one area where the EIA exercise has highlighted a failure of the process. Whilst I have refused to advertise vacancies from other establishments that I felt contravened the Disability Discrimination Act, I have failed to actively engage with people who have disabilities to look at ways of increasing participation. When inviting people to interview I ask them if they need me to make any special arrangements for them, which I believed would support disabled interviewees. However, I have not taken affirmative action to ensure that the 7% of students who register a disability with HESA are reflected in my KTP applications. C. Mitigating adverse impact 7. Proposed method to reduce or eliminate adverse impact (Describe actions that will be taken to do this. Have your plans been revised in the light of the consultation results, to enhance positive impact or reduce/eliminate negative impact? Are there any specific factors which will need to be taken into account? If the policy, procedure, service or function is likely to have an adverse impact on any equality strand can this be justified? - guideline 200 words.) 3

4 Gender In light of conducting this EIA I need to consult with various external and internal bodies to analyse why sufficient women are not applying for KTP positions. I propose to engage with a focus group of female student engineers to ascertain why they do not apply for KTPs and asking them what would induce them to do so. I will also contact other women engineers through the Athena SWAN group to gain their ideas about promoting KTP to women. Race - Whilst this EIA does not appear to highlight any adverse impact with regards to race I still need to engage with stakeholders (i.e. current, recent and external jobseekers) to enhance the positive impact of our KTP recruitment strategy. I will liaise with our Careers Advisory Service to gain access to BME students who are actively job seeking to understand what attracts them to job advertisements (positive language, images etc) and what prevents them from applying for certain positions. Disability As a matter of urgency I need to address this area by consultation with stakeholders. I therefore propose to speak with members of the disabled students group to ask for their views on recruitment advertising. I will contact the Disabled Workers Group at Bath and North East Somerset Council for their advice about eliminating the negative impact that seems apparent in the KTP recruitment strategy. I will set up a discussion forum on to engage with disabled student job seekers and get their opinions on what attracts them to particular vacancies. 8. Areas of Equality Relevance: (Against each of the following please say whether there is an adverse impact risk in relation to race, gender or disability (there could be more than on equality strand affected) Areas of High Adverse Impact Risk: Gender and Disability Areas of Medium Adverse Impact Risk: Race 9. Conclusions and recommendations for amendments to the policy/practice Summarise what has emerged and identify any actions required, being clear as to who will carry each out. Whilst the numbers of actual KTP Associates recruited does not appear to highlight an adverse impact in terms of Gender and Race, it is apparent that fewer women are applying for KTP positions. This cannot be fully explained by the HESA statistics on gender participation in certain subject specialisation. Race does not appear to be an issue as we receive both quantity and quantity in terms of applications from people from BME backgrounds and this is reflected in the numbers of KTP Associates who are recruited. However, it seems that there is an adverse impact risk in relation to Disability which needs to be urgently addressed. I believe that most of the adverse impact is as a result of the advertising of the vacancies as opposed to the process of shortlisting of candidates and the interview process. Therefore more work needs to be done to consult with stakeholders in each of the diversity strands about what attracts them to job advertisements. Once I have analysed the information I collect I will be able to adjust the wording of my advertising accordingly and hopefully gain some insight into better targeting of vacancy advertisements (e.g. more appropriate websites). This will not only ensure that we are adhering to the relevant discrimination laws but will ensure that our Associates fully reflect the diversity of our community as a whole. This undoubtedly 4

5 makes good business sense to our partner clients who will gain the benefit of recruiting from the widest spectrum of graduate talent. As an ongoing exercise I will be more closely monitoring applications to measure the impact of any changes made and if necessary will continue to process of consultation and engagement with stakeholder groups to ensure that our vacancy advertising captures applicants from the under-represented groups. 10. Timescale for implementation: (This should normally be not more than 1 year but be realistic). Disability As a matter of urgency this needs to be addressed. Consultation is already underway and the first phase of this exercise will be completed by the end of May However, this will be an ongoing exercise, forming part of my job. The changes necessary to the wording and placing of vacancy advertisements will be incorporated as soon as information is received. Gender Consultation with stakeholders will be completed by the end of July 2010 and will be an ongoing exercise, again forming part of my job. The changes necessary to the wording and placing of vacancy advertisements will be incorporated as soon as information is received. Race I will continue to monitor the application statistics and the Associate cohort to ensure that there is no race bias creeping into the KTP recruitment process. In general, this EIA has highlighted that constant monitoring is needed and each KTP recruitment cycle will be analysed as it occurs. This will be implemented from today. D. Publication 11. Final reporter: Marie Morley 12. Date: 27 January Next review date: 31 January