Departmental Research Expectations

Research Performance Expectations

This document is written specifically with core Department of Environment and Geography (DEG) staff on ART contracts, to provide guidance around expectations with regards to research. These expectations are equally applicable to Grade 7 (and higher) SEI-Y staff and are adjusted appropriately for colleagues returning to work after career breaks and working on contracts of less than 1.0 FTE. The emphasis for all of these expectations is on quality not quantity.

The DEG has a requirement that those staff who are allocated time for independent academic research, work toward meeting certain expectations in terms of their outputs and activities. The fraction of working time that an individual dedicates to research, versus teaching or administrative duties, is set individually by the Head of Department. However, the Departmental workload model (this applies to core DEG staff rather than SEI-Y) provides a reference. Each full-time member of staff has a total of 1665 hours per annum. Out of this total, 100 hours are allocated for the writing of research proposals and 300 hours for undertaking research. For any grants that are already held, the externally funded hours in each grant are also accounted for in the workload model. Seventy additional hours are allocated per PhD student and also for any PDRAs where PI time is not allocated in the associated grant.

The research expectations cover four distinct areas: publications; research funding; external engagement and PhD students. “Over-achievement” in one area should not be viewed as an alternative to aiming to meet expectations in all areas. However, it is recognized that people excel in different areas and that research outputs and impact take numerous forms. These expectations will not be applied in an overly rigid manner or used to penalise staff in the instance of non-attainment; in practice individual funding opportunities, research outputs, or external activities will not occur in a neatly divided way over each calendar year. The expectations should be viewed as average aspirations over a period of perhaps two to three years, both at individual and also departmental level.

1. Publications

The research expectation for publications is focused solely on the production of the highest quality publications. Each member of staff should publish work in leading journals and/or major book publishers as relevant by discipline and on a regular basis. All research active staff should:

Typically submit at least one high quality journal paper per year equivalent or better than 3* quality as determined by REF and at a minimum, no less than four 3* papers within the REF period (adjusted for FTE for part-time, special circumstances or ECR status).

The production of large volumes of lower quality papers will not offset the requirement to produce at least one 3* paper each year. Colleagues are encouraged to have draft papers internally reviewed through our internal peer review system/research groups, in order to maximise the quality of papers. From past experience, many papers can be improved significantly by thinking more carefully about the scientific aim, objectives and key messages – even modifications to the title and abstract alone can sometimes better present the international and fundamental scientific advances being made. If every member of staff submitted papers to internal peer review, overall quality would significantly increase.

2. Research funding

In order to carry out research some level of funding is required and all staff are expected to try and obtain external sources of funding to support their research. In the current financial situation, funding can be very hard to achieve and UKRI funding pools are likely to shrink further. European funding is also more uncertain than in the past. Therefore, it is important for us all to think creatively about how to obtain the funding necessary to pursue our research interests, looking beyond UKRI. Whilst we wish to encourage collaboration between staff within the Department, in order to meet our Departmental financial targets, it is also important that all staff foster research collaborations outside the Department. Given the current financial climate the aim is to produce “fundable” proposals acknowledging that in the current climate not all “fundable” proposals will be funded. Thus staff are expected to:

Submit at least one significant proposal per year to an external funder (i.e. sufficient to support the equivalent of a PDRA based in the DEG or acquire a substantial capital item for the Department)

and

Be working on a grant application or to be an award holder. In addition, senior staff (SL and above) will generally be expected to act as PI or CoI on collaborative/major grant applications, though this does not preclude smaller applications.

These expectations should be interpreted reasonably, and with the broader benefits of the Department in mind. For example, a single, relatively small grant application involving a high number of Co-Is, would not satisfy the expectations alone. Similarly, the involvement of a member of staff on an application as a Co-I (in terms of funded time and/or academic contribution) – or the cumulative involvement on several projects as CoI – should be of a reasonable amount in order to satisfy these expectations.

3. External engagement

External engagement can take many forms and be achieved in many different ways. The most successful academic departments in the UK have staff that are highly influential in the development of national and international policy and research strategies, and with funders including industry, charities and government. All staff should:

Endeavour to translate their research so that maximum impact can be achieved

In addition to research having impact, as research active academics we can seek to influence funding agencies, government bodies, industry etc. and play an active role in the wider academic community. Therefore, all staff should:

Maintain an appropriate national and international profile through engaging with key funders, government bodies, industry etc. (e.g. engaging with / participating on RCUK committees, reviewing grant proposals, sitting on advisory panels), participating in the publication review process, attending and presenting at external conferences, presenting invited seminars and lectures, and engaging in public/media outreach.

When research is published or reaches a critical milestone, all staff should aim to actively report (and discuss) any potential practical value of the findings to the relevant bodies and partners, using whatever form of communication is most likely to be understood and well-received. If you would like to do more of this but are not sure where to start, please contact the Chair of DRC and/or the Research Admin team.

4. PhD students

Rather like research funding, the funding landscape for PhD students has changed significantly over the last few years with the introduction of Doctoral Training Programmes and Centres for Doctoral Training. Opportunities exist outside these avenues, e.g. overseas government funding, industrial funding etc. Rather like research funding it is incumbent on us all to think creatively and beyond UKRI for PhD funding. Staff should therefore:

Aim to recruit one PhD student per year.

We encourage all staff to tap into the departmental schemes, namely the NERC ACCE and White Rose/ESRC DTPs. We have also recently become part of the University’s EPSRC DTP allocation.

Non-attainment of expectations

Some colleagues will not currently be meeting these expectations for a variety of reasons, for such as engagement in a core administrative role or heavy/new teaching load or for personal circumstances. Where appropriate, support via the Performance Development Review mechanism will be provided to help all colleagues to achieve these research expectations and also to set objectives tailored to the individual that can take into account contributions across research, teaching and administration.

Variation in research expectations across grades

More senior grades are likely to have a stronger track record in research and also more experience in proposal writing. However, there are also likely to be more pulls on their time. They certainly do not have a monopoly on good research ideas. At present the research expectations are universally applicable whilst acknowledging that more is expected of individuals as they move through the grades.

Environment and Geography DRC, November 2019