Centralised versus decentralised. Issues of professionalism in research support services.

Centralised versus decentralised Issues of Professionalism in Research Support Services

EARMA Annual Meeting Braganca 24 of June 2011

Susi Poli and Liz Hancock [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Contents

Briefly, an introductory glance at the context/setting: main streams of funding, EU research grants, university reform and restructuring processes

The Centre of the Uni: the Research Support Framework/the Research Support Department, and provision of highly specialized research support services

The Periphery of the Uni: research support services and initiatives/new Groups at the Dept of Statistics

Stages of work/analysis: MBA project works and WSAN seminar at UniBo

Current field of research (surveys, open discussions, round tables)

Other university frameworks and comparison: evidence and models from other Universities

Points of discussion and reflection, to nurture other topics/issues

A glance at the University of Bologna

Current Organization Bologna University consists of 5 regional campuses, of which Bologna is one (the

national “Multi Campus programme” started in 1995), 16 central support departments (the “centre”) and 70 research departments (the “periphery”), 23 Faculties. The number of students is almost 86,000, staff (especially civil servants, but also temporary-fixed term contracts) over 6,000 (academic staff: 3,174 and administrative staff: 2,928)

Restructuring in progress 35 Depts, 12 max Schools for shared services, new roles and positions, selection of

managers, several support staff at risk of redundancy Results in EU research 151 EU projects, especially under the Cooperation funding scheme (ICT and KBBE)

The “Centre”: investment on research support The Research Support Framework and the Research Department

Research is one of the university priorities, so the Research Support Framework (RSF),

issued in 2005, implies a new shape for the Research Support Department (Central

Support Department made up of about 70 specialized staff, 56 of whom are permanent)

Set up some innovative research support services as well as new university grants

Mainly, focus on EU research projects (FP7), so offices specialized in supporting

researchers in all the stages along the whole process (from pre-application to project

completion)

About the new support services: unit in charge of running EU projects by the “centre”,

IRT (Integrated Research Team), CRR (Research Support Centers), JRL (Joint

Research Laboratories)

About the EU Research Support Service

FP7 funded projects have been run by the “Centre”, that’s the core of the innovation

(with the support of the Financial Department)

Namely projects launched by different scientific disciplines/departments, but researchers

never in direct touch with the Management (the main difference Centre-Periphery)

Especially management and reporting (intermediate and final ones) of EU research

projects (stress on focused expertise in the Centre)

Training programmes for departments staff (to run other funded projects, in the future)

Fees required by the Centre for services provided (a fixed amount of 2% of the project’s

budget)

Dealing with some barriers met along the way

Perception of some dichotomy between “centre” and “periphery” of the university (in

procedures and practices, in expertise/professionalism, in number of staff)

Some debate on the mission of central support departments (really supportive?)

Some difficulties arise in providing high quality services, such as financial ones, due to

the involvement of other offices/staff (such as the Financial Department); so a different

way of working and of setting their own priorities (which can vary between Central

Depts/staff)

Still on the way of developing an ICT system to support management of EU projects

The “Periphery” of the Uni: some Departments and their effort to deal effectively with research support

My own experience, made up of 5 years spent in the “Centre” (Research Support Dept)

and 1 year spent at the Stat Dept (research dept)

Initial training for all the Dept. Staff (also new colleagues) on management and on new

proposals to launch

Meeting with all the researchers (after identifying all the potential fields of expertise

within the Stat Dept) and promotion of funding schemes based on individuals/groups

Task 4 Research: share support services with other departments to identify currently

unknown funding (based in the UK or US); adopt best practice and share knowledge of

the terms and conditions of known funding schemes

Set up an Intranet site for information regarding research (Stat 4 Research)

Strengths against Weaknesses of research support in the “Periphery”

Experience on the ground aiming to achieve the alignment of skills among researchers-

support staff

Some perceived fragmentation of activities and tasks (small ones enormously time

consuming and with a low rate of specialism required), so attempt of identifying time-

consuming activities requiring low professionalism (more in Depts than in the Centre)

Found some potential risks of overlapping among rules (university and EU regulations),

especially related to Travels (all the funding schemes), Gross Grants (MC) to be paid to

researchers in mobility, selection of candidates/experts (to avoid one more selection

process!)

Strengths against Weaknesses “Centre”-”Periphery”: a comparison

Centre + Centre - Periphery + Periphery -

Strong specialism and research professionals for comparison and exchange of good practices

No research on the ground, time and expectations not shared with researchers

Research on the ground No only Front Office but combination and alignment of skills (not the 2 sides of the community)

Small tasks and low profile (with a lot of responsibility)

Managers of research only (one stream of activity, only, that’s EU research)

Bank Interests for Coordinators into one bank account

Our own bank account to gather interests (to report)

A few research professionals (department managers, so in charge of + general issues and tasks)

Only in charge of the Theory of EU research, practice based on the Financial Office (or Depts)

Payments proceeded through the Financial Office (into the Fin Support Dept): ≠ Central Support Dept, so different offices in charge of stages of the same process/different culture for people sometimes based on a Central Support Dept and not others

Skills continuously shared and combined/aligned between support staff and researchers (open channel of communication)

Professional skills need to be spread around, among administrators

Less losses of funds

Direct management of projects, not other offices/people/practices involved (culture)

Burdens of work that deal with general tasks

The outset of our researching on support services and research professionals

MBA in HE Management, further studies and final report based on the topic (mine in 2010, then

Liz’s one, now)

Celia Whitchurch findings on professionals in Higher Education and so called “Third spaces of

collaboration”

A WSAN-ESMU seminar already scheduled in Bologna end of Sept. 2011 titled on “Developing

professional skills for university services of the future” and Celia already involved in the WSAN-

ESMU seminar

As a part of Liz’s project work for the MBA, we have carried out a survey across the UniBo

submitted to research staff and researchers to investigate their perception when dealing with the

provision of research support services

Only intermediate findings, data to be still completely analyzed but … some tricky points of

reflection

A glance at the surveys/questionnaires - 1

QUESTION 1: How do you see the reform in the Italian Higher Education sector affecting you and your Department generally? Please, check your choice (one only)

QUESTION 1.2: And how do you see the reform affecting you in terms of delivering of

support to research? Please, check your choice (one only) Positively, I hope to have more rationalization of structures and better definition of roles I don’t know, the future seems quite uncertain Negatively, the same mixture and no definition What are your main concerns? (in your own words)


QUESTION 2: How do you perceive the support offered by you (or to you, for researchers) and all the Support Staff in the University and in the Department now? Please, check your choice (one only)

Low support, depending both on number of staff and skills/degree of professionalism Moderate but with room for improvement Relatively high. We now have some good research professionals around (within the

Dept or in ARIC) who improve the quality of support for grants QUESTION 3: Do you think that the current Departmental Support staff have the skills to

give adequate support to research? Please, check your choice (one only) Yes, the current staff have the required set of skills No, they should acquire some more skills, specific to research (budgeting, reporting,

advice on a wider range of funding schemes, command of English, so on) I don’t know, I can’t answer


QUESTION 4: What would you like your Department to do to address your concerns and deliver better research support services? Please rank your 3 best choices (1=favorite choice, 2=second choice, 3= third choice)

Broadly, more support staff for research Same staff but better trained to support research (more self-confident in performing

functions) Research Professionals within Departments to support researchers throughout the

research project from pre-application to project completion Research Professionals within Departments to support researchers, more specifically in

charge of supporting the right funding schemes or bids writing or budgeting/management/reporting


QUESTION 5: What additional skills should you and your staff acquire that will help researchers to better perform in research? Please rank your 3 best choices (1=favorite choice, 2=second choice, 3= third choice)

To be involved throughout the lifespan of projects, from writing bids to reporting Wider knowledge of funding schemes, to capture other funding opportunities, probably less

exploited and perhaps more fitting for my research purposes Budgeting and/or reporting skills Knowledge both of research/technical rules and university regulations/practice in order to always

ensure compatibility between the two Financial/technical rules Skills of setting up networks and coordination between partners and researchers Good command of English, to support reviewing of abstracts/whole stage of proposal Project management skills, to provide timelines of research stages Deeper knowledge of tricky mechanisms (influential people, behavior in organization, so on)

regulating research relationships (lobbying, networking), seen as strategic skills when dealing with bids/unknown funding schemes

Leadership skills


QUESTION 4 and perception of existing research support services:

Options Researchers Ranking

Research Support Staff

Ranking

More support staff 3 No mention (!)

Same staff but better trained 3 3

Research Professionals from pre-application to project completion

2 2

Research professionals only for some stages (or support for identifying funding opportunities, or bids writing, or budgeting/reporting)

1 1


QUESTION 5 and skills thought as compulsory (1=preferred choice, 2= second choice, 3= third option):

List of skills Researchers ranking

Research Support Staff ranking

Wider knowledge of funding schemes

1 1

Setting up networks and coordination btw partners/researchers

3 3

Understanding of tricky mechanisms (lobbying, networking)

2

Involvement all along the project

2 3

PM skills 3

Financial/technical rules

Command of English 2 2






1


3



3

PM skills


Command of English 2






1


3


2


2

PM skills 3


Command of English 2


QUESTION 5 and skills thought as compulsory:




1 1



Compliance technical rules with university regulations

PM skills


Command of English



List of skills Researchers Ranking

Research Support Staff Ranking




2 No mention


PM skills


Command of English









2 3

PM skills


Command of English









PM skills


Command of English 2 2


Perceptions of research support services/research professionals were explored from two

different perspectives (i.e. from researchers' standpoint and support staffs' standpoint)

About the sample of researchers and research staff: ≠ depts (50)

The first questions, about the national reform, have paid much attention to the current

sensitivity of people, all relatevely worried about the future and some expected changes

Especially tricky the last questions, concerning the skills thought as necessary or

compulsory for research support

Used both closed questions and rankings (only one open slot for comments)

Intermediate results (with most of the quests still due)

Other university frameworks already known and explored

Some evidence comes directly from the Erasmus schemes for Mobility (Staff and

Mundus Cooperation Window) (bearing in mind the Bologna Process), among others,

Utrecht Uni, Sarajevo and Madrid Carlos III

Dealing with issues of: features of research support services (centralised-decentralised),

ICT tools, time-sheets (ICT based or not), strategies to be based in Brussels (offices,

individuals, or “alliances”), meeting with researchers, training for pioneers, exploration of

other funding schemes, financial literacy and rules, quality assessment in departments

activities, support staff/offices in the “centre” and in the “periphery” and their

relationships, so on

Other university frameworks already known and explored - 2

Aware that all the universities have adopted their own framework, more or less

centralised or decentralised to deal with provision of research support

Centre and periphery, and related research support services, can vary depending on ...

issue to be still explored, but let’s have a glance, first, at some of the models met along

the way:

- all in the centre (no support staff in the periphery/faculties)

- light centre (1-2 staff) and stronger periphery (5-10 people)

- strong centre (70) and a lighter periphery (5-10) the current UniBo model

Let’s play a game!

List all the research profiles that you know (EU Funding Advisor, so on) Take into consideration some “special” profiles, such as Research Facilitator, Research

Portfolio Development Officer, and EU Funding Portfolio Advisor and add examples Profiles seem to be well shaped according to the needs/expectations of the Uni and its

researchers (self-confident, pioneers, so on) So, profiles can be said as derived directly from the Uni Research Framework or shaped

independently? Why other university services don’t seem to have the same wide spectrum of

profiles/names for their professionals? (f.e. Director of Student Services)

Let’s play a game! - 3

Task 4 Research Working Group means: Play all the roles, from Research Facilitator, Research Portfolio Development Officer, and EU

Funding Portfolio Advisor Share expertise on unknown funding schemes Share experience in running and reporting, and advising Supporting other Depts when applying for such funding Need of identifying strategically important funding opportunities, so stress on pre-award support

for researchers Overview on all the known funding schemes, around the world even if aware that it could seem a

waste of time as funding schemes are not static And all the related financial guidelines, stressing main features and constraints (if existing) so to

lead the University not to invest on that grant Influence on university policy applied to Research

Some more points of reflection

List of skills Centre or Periphery How to address the issue?


Periphery Task 4 Research


Centre and some Periphery

DB Research Support Dept and some Periphery


Centre (and some individual – especially individual researchers – in the Periphery)

Task 4 Research


Periphery Task 4 Research

PM skills Centre EU Management Office

Financial/technical rules Centre EU Management Office

Command of English Centre and some Periphery

In progress, only for Depts

Thanks and contacts

We thank for your attention All your comments welcome

Ready to keep debating on presentation/issues

[email protected] [email protected]





Centralised versus decentralised. Issues of professionalism in research support services.

Documents

Transcript of Centralised versus decentralised. Issues of professionalism in research support services.