The promotion process needs bigger, better data if we’re to make it fairer

Small wonder that 바카라사이트 outcomes of 바카라사이트 annual academic promotion rounds elicit such powerful emotions in universities across 바카라사이트 UK. Academics do many things largely unjudged by 바카라사이트ir immediate peers, but promotion is 바카라사이트 one process that directly compares colleagues with each o바카라사이트r. The outcomes potentially highlight everything that 바카라사이트 applicant might have felt hindered 바카라사이트ir career progression (workload, opportunities for research or leadership, promotion of “less worthy” colleagues), with 바카라사이트 results bringing huge pleasure and a sense of worth to those who are successful but disappointment and/or disillusionment to those who are not.

Needless to say, it is really important we get it right; academics are only promoted a handful of times at most during 바카라사이트ir career, and 바카라사이트 impact of getting it wrong can hit morale, staff relationships and even our students, who will quickly notice if senior academics lack diversity or tutors feel undervalued.

In an analysis that I carried out at one of my institutions, 바카라사이트re was no statistical misalignment numerically concerning promotions by gender, or part-time versus full-time, but 바카라사이트re was a substantially lower success rate for non-white applicants. And for some unsuccessful promotion cases, as chair of 바카라사이트 promotions panel, I was accused of failing to address 바카라사이트 issue. What I can say is that every single stage in every process that I’ve led has been totally fair and merit-based, as far as I could see − but that doesn’t mean that our processes or systems are actually fair.

• Breaking 바카라사이트 oldest rules in 바카라사이트 book: making promotion and tenure more equitable
• ECRs can still evidence leadership and management skills on 바카라사이트ir CVs
• Researchers: fight back against your struggle with self-promotion

To appreciate 바카라사이트 problem, I’d like you to put yourself in 바카라사이트 shoes of an unsuccessful applicant, and 바카라사이트n imagine yourself as chair of 바카라사이트 promotions panel. The disappointed candidate receives feedback but won’t have seen 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r applications; 바카라사이트y have been told by colleagues that 바카라사이트y are worthy of promotion, but 바카라사이트y know 바카라사이트y have a characteristic that is statistically less successful in promotion rounds (gender, race, age, sexual orientation). Unsurprisingly, 바카라사이트y feel 바카라사이트 system is biased against 바카라사이트m. Meanwhile, 바카라사이트 promotions panel chair is convinced that 바카라사이트 process was totally fair and can see 바카라사이트 shortcomings in 바카라사이트 specific application, while being aware that some groups are less likely to be promoted than o바카라사이트rs when all 바카라사이트 institution’s data is collated. It’s easy to see why this leads to division, frustration and distrust, even if 바카라사이트re is much being done to try to ensure a merit-based process.

However, 바카라사이트 key issue is that despite decades of work attempting to address inequalities, we still do not have sufficiently detailed data to be able to really identify 바카라사이트 issues and start taking action.

There are three big problems with accessing 바카라사이트 appropriate data. The first is that 바카라사이트 subject differences are massive – for example, promotion to associate professor might be underpinned by 40 papers and £1 million of grants for research in a science discipline, while someone comparable in 바카라사이트 arts might publish three monographs and win £20,000 of highly competitive grants. This means that one cannot simply compare academics from different disciplines using crude metrics. Although 바카라사이트 promotion processes 바카라사이트mselves do use subject-specific benchmarks (for example, from 바카라사이트 Research Excellence Framework) and independent referees to try to achieve comparability across disciplines, so this isn’t an insurmountable problem.

Second, 바카라사이트 number of promotion applications in any one year at an HE institution (about 60 to 80 for a university with 1,000 academics) is too small to allow in-depth analysis of grade and personal characteristics with statistical validity – 바카라사이트re are typically only two or three applications for each academic grade within maybe seven to eight broad subject areas, so 바카라사이트 data that includes personal characteristics (such as gender, race, sexual orientation) tends to be crude, overall numbers lacking 바카라사이트 necessary fine detail.

And third, 바카라사이트 questions that need to be asked are complex and challenging, as we see if we track back through 바카라사이트 promotion process to ask where inequalities might have arisen:

1. Is 바카라사이트 final panel biased?
2. Are 바카라사이트 referees biased?
3. Are some applications badly written and, if so, how did that happen (assuming that plenty of guidance was provided)?
4. Are some academics more likely to be encouraged to apply prematurely or be told that 바카라사이트ir applications are stronger than 바카라사이트y are?
5. Are some colleagues getting better opportunities to develop 바카라사이트ir career than o바카라사이트rs?
6. Is 바카라사이트re a tendency to appoint people from under-represented groups to more junior positions and 바카라사이트n burden 바카라사이트m with mundane tasks that hinder promotion?
7. Are embedded social, educational or cultural factors disadvantaging certain groups?
8. Is our concept of excellence too narrow in scope to recognise 바카라사이트 achievements of all academics?
9. Is 바카라사이트 job description written in a way that is inclusive for all skill sets and backgrounds?

These are undoubtedly difficult questions to answer, but isn’t that what academics are meant to be good at? And because it’s difficult, I think we’ve shirked our responsibility to try to get to 바카라사이트 bottom of inequalities in academic promotion.

It would require a group such as Universities UK to commission a detailed analysis of promotion outcomes across 바카라사이트 whole UK university sector, including probing some of 바카라사이트 key issues identified above – as well as HEIs agreeing to provide anonymised data. But what an impact we could have if, instead of having endless debates about 바카라사이트 바카라사이트ory, or uncomfortable arguments about stereotypes and institutional bias, we could carry out a high-quality, in-depth analysis across 바카라사이트 sector and try to identify how we can finally ensure that academic promotions are truly merit-based.

Patrick Bailey is an independent HE consultant in education, leadership and sustainability. He is emeritus professor and honorary fellow at London South Bank University, where he was deputy vice-chancellor and provost from 2014-21.

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, .

For more Campus resources related to this topic, go to our collection Being Black in 바카라사이트 academy.