High Educ DOI 10.1007/s10734-009-9292-z
Occupying a ‘third space’: research trained professional staff in Australian universities Judith E. Berman • Tim Pitman
Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009
Abstract Despite the expansion and professionalisation of university administration over the past 20 years there has been no scholarly study on the extent to which universities, which promote the value of generic skills from research degrees to prospective research students and their employers, capitalize on the research and transferable skills of PhD graduates later employed in the university sector as professional staff. Findings from this study of research-trained professional staff at one research-intensive Australian university suggests that these professionals are using their research and generic skills in management roles, to the benefit of the university. In the context of the knowledge based economy, this study suggests that universities could benefit from actively targeting the products of their own system for professional roles. Keywords Professional and general staff Generic and transferable skills Research training Higher education policy
Introduction Since the mid-1980s major changes have occurred in the higher education sector worldwide, including declining funding from state governments, encouragement for the strengthening of research partnerships and collaborations with ‘industry’, rising student numbers, internationalization, and increased reporting requirement. In adapting to this new environment universities have created management and administrative structures with some similarities to those found in the private sector (Marginson and Considine 2000). A layer of professional roles central to the operations of universities has arisen in areas such as student services, international operations, alumni services, marketing and public relations, human resource management, information sciences, research commercialization and research management. Descriptors of this heterogeneous group, which range from J. E. Berman (&) T. Pitman Research Services M459, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Perth, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia e-mail:
[email protected]
123
High Educ
‘professionals’ and ‘administrators’, to ‘non-academic’ and ‘general staff’, reflect the diversity of these roles and to some extent, differing views on the value and importance of these roles. The traditional ‘academic-general staff divide’, characterized by clear differences in the roles of general and academic staff and between administrative and academic activity has been blurred by the expansion and professionalisation of university administration over the past 20 years (McInnis 1998; Dobson 2000; Dobson and Conway 2003; Eveline 2004; Szerkes 2004, 2006; Whitchurch 2006a; Collinson 2006, 2007; Gornitzka and Larsen 2004). One of the early commentaries on this trend was the Dearing report (1997) which coined the term ‘new professionals’ to refer to staff employed in dynamic and autonomous roles in growth areas of higher education in the UK. Whitchurch (2006a, p. 6) has conceptualised a ‘third space’ alongside more familiar academic and administrative areas, populated by ‘hybrid multi-professionals’ or ‘cross boundary professionals’ who ‘‘…demonstrate the ability to cross functional boundaries, often performing translational and interpretive functions between different constituencies, within and outside the university’’. More recently she has also identified what she calls ‘unbounded professionals’ who disregard organisational structures, often breaking new ground and working in complex and ambiguous conditions to contribute to institutional development (Whitchurch 2008). Within US universities, ‘managerial professionals’ have emerged who ‘‘engage in activities related to producing quality education, entrepreneurial revenues, research and students’’ (Rhoades and Sporn 2002, p. 16). The professional associations for research management (Society of Research Administrators and National Council of University Research Administrators) and student affairs (NASPA—Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education) have established codes of professional standards, professional development and accreditation, academic journals, and a body of knowledge and skills that underpin the profession (Carpenter and Stimpson 2007). New and specialized roles in teaching and professional development centres, central development offices, foundations for fundraising, and technology transfer units and parks have also emerged within Australian universities (Coaldrake and Stedman 1999; Association for Tertiary Education Management (ATEM) 2001). Concurrent with the increase in the number of specialised professional staff roles in higher education institutions worldwide has been a significant increase in PhD enrolments over the past decade (DEST 2007, What do PhDs do? – Trends 2007). PhD graduates are increasingly embarking on a wide variety of post-PhD destinations. Only about one-third of PhD graduates in the US, UK and Australia remain in academia (Brooks 2008; What do PhDs do? – Trends 2007; Schiermeirer 2005; Western et al. 2007; Graduate Careers Australia 2005). Recent research in Australia reports that postgraduates value their research training in their various employment destinations (Western et al. 2007), but to our knowledge there has been no scholarly study on the extent to which universities, which promote the value of generic skills from research degrees to prospective research students and their employers, capitalize on the research and generic or transferable (hereafter generic) skills of PhD graduates later employed in the university sector as general staff. Although the majority of general staff in Australia have undergraduate or Honours degrees and some have higher degrees by research (Dobson and Conway 2003), and some of the latter are tutoring, guest lecturing, supervising PhD students, mentoring and publishing (McInnis 1998; Dobson and Conway 2003), we do not know the extent to which those with postgraduate qualifications use their research training and generic skills in their professional roles. Do research-trained general staff value and utilise use their research skills and generic skills and attributes from their PhD to value add to their position? This important
123
High Educ
but unanswered question led this team to undertake preliminary research on researchtrained general staff at one research-intensive Australian university.
Methodology This study employed a qualitative methodology. Responses collected from professional staff were analysed to explore the ways in which these individuals’ prior research training contributed to the ways in which they performed their work duties. Without a doubt, the reflections are shaped by the individual’s perceptions of what is important information. Furthermore, the construction of data was a one-way process; for example unlike interviews there was not an opportunity for the researchers to ask follow-up questions, or prompt additional detail. The benefit, however, is that the information provided by the respondent has not been filtered by the researchers: that is, the content provided is, by the very virtue of it being provided, considered significant by the research respondent. The primary value of this study is in its qualitative analysis of the ways in which research-trained staff use their research and generic skills in their professional staff roles. Whilst the researchers do not suggest that the conclusions drawn from this study might be directly transferable to another site of study, they do believe that there is a strong case what for Sim (1998) refers to as theoretical generalization: insights which possess a sufficient degree of generality which make them valuable in other, comparable contexts. Responses, which ranged from a few sentences to four pages with the average length being about two full paragraphs, were characterised by thoughtfulness and reflection. Most distinguished between research skills and generic skills acquired during the course of their PhD, and used examples to demonstrate how they used those skills in their current roles. The Research Council of UK’s Joint Skills Statement (RCUK JSS 2001) has been adopted as a framework for analysis of how professional staff with PhDs use skills from their research training in their current roles. The Joint Skills Statement of Skills Training Requirements identifies, in seven categories, the competencies that a postgraduate researcher should have or develop during the course of their PhD degree programme. Three of the skills—research skills and techniques, research environment, research management—are more research specific, while the other four—personal effectiveness, communication skills, team working and networking skills, and career management—are more generic capabilities. This paper firstly identifies the generic and transferable skills being used by professional staff, secondly looks at the research skills and techniques and research management skills utilised, and thirdly examines their understandings of the research environment.
Data collection This study, undertaken in 2008, was based on an email survey of general staff with PhDs at one Australian research-intensive university. Records from the university’s Human Resources section indicated that a total of 1,914 (or 1686 FTE) staff were employed on general staff contracts; 34 of whom had PhDs (excluding postdoctoral researchers on general staff contracts, veterinary surgeons and dentists). The survey asked these general staff with PhDs to write about ways in which they may be applying their research and generic skills from their PhD to their current role. Existing university research management systems were utilised to identify whether any of these staff were researching and
123
High Educ
publishing. Only 24 of the 34 general staff with PhDs from the list provided by HR were contactable; 5 were on leave and 5 had left the university or could not be contacted. The authors identified an additional 14 general staff with PhDs. In all, a total of 38 general staff with PhDs were surveyed, of which 32 responded, indicating a response rate of 84%. Of these 19 were female. Of the 32 general staff with PhDs who responded to the survey, 18 (56%) worked in either research or student management or development, or as School or Business Managers. The remainder worked in areas ranging from library and information services and commercialisation offices through to IT, equity offices and the management of scientific facilities. All had management or developmental roles and were not employed on academic staff contracts (although as we will see, many undertook work which was ‘academic’ in nature) and all were employed on HEE Level 7 or above. This study will henceforth refer to this group as ‘professional staff’ due to the professional nature of their roles and in light of current discussions about introducing a new staff category along these lines. Excluded from the project were academic managers such as Heads of Schools, Deans and Pro-Vice Chancellors.
Results Consistent with previous research (AUT 2001; McInnis 1998; Dobson and Conway 2003; Collinson 2006, 2007), our findings reveal that a significant number of professional staff were contributing to their original discipline areas, mostly through research and/or teaching, including tutoring, guest lecturing, supervising PhD students, and mentoring. In line with their academic background, some of this work is subsequently being published, further enhancing the benefits of the research to the university. As the evidence below suggests, we found that these professionals were using their research and generic skills on a daily basis in their roles to the benefit of the university. They were identifying issues confronting their university, applying research methodologies to these issues (including the collection, analysis and interpretation of data), preparing position or policy papers, and initiating and facilitating the implementation of solutions to problems. Generic/transferable skills and attributes All of the professionals surveyed recognized that in addition to research skills they had also, to a greater or lesser degree, acquired during their PhD a range of generic skills and attributes—these included written and oral communication, networking, personal effectiveness, career management and emotional intelligence. Advanced written communication is one of the key skills gained in a research higher degree. These professionals conveyed that they used this skill daily to communicate with staff, argue an opinion, write reports, policies, procedures and discussion papers, and develop student resources. As in academic writing, professional reports of all kinds should be constructed with coherent arguments and ideas must be clearly articulated. One School Manager commented: I think the ability to analyse information and present it in a simple format to the academics has helped me a lot as they are able to see and understand the reason behind some [of] the decisions…Some of the tough financial communications with
123
High Educ
very senior academics have been made easy as I analyse and pin point where the problem is and who needs to correct it. While excellent writing skills were imperative for these professionals, they also recognized that information had to be presented appropriately to the needs of different audiences—be it to government, industry or the university. A School Manager explained that she simplified financial reports for the academics to a bottom line approach of ‘what’s left to spend’ in this grant and made reports of research more tangible to non-scientists in government by ‘‘translat[ing] the research language’’ and providing jargon free summaries. An Equity Officer similarly stated: ‘‘The ability to process complex information and translate it into an accessible form appropriate to its audience and purpose is also an invaluable outcome of this [PhD] process’’. Oral communication skills, acquired during the PhD, mostly from seminar and conference presentations, were particularly useful to those surveyed who were in roles which primarily focused on teaching and mentoring to support the learning of others, be they undergraduate or postgraduate students, or staff. One Student Support Officer stated: ‘‘…the communication and expression skills used in public speaking (developed during my PhD) are used daily in my role whether in front of a class or at a committee meeting’’. It is common for PhD students to avail themselves of opportunities to present their research and network at conferences. Many of those surveyed noted that these experiences had provided them with confidence to both network and present research or exemplar programmes at a range of public forums. As one Student Support Manager commented: Having a visible presence at conferences (rather than just being a member of the audience as many of my colleagues without research skills…) means that I get requests for information which leads to information-sharing, networking and other opportunities for collaboration. Many had attended national conferences, often on an annual basis, in their professional area and had thus appreciated the need for, and had shown commitment to, continued professional development. They had presented refereed conference papers at key conferences in professional practice areas and in this way were adding value as it gave their university a higher profile nationally. The only constraint on their professional development and indeed, in some cases a source of discontent, seemed to be a lack of recognition and a corresponding dearth of funding for such activities from university sources! Personal Effectiveness was another skill that had been acquired during the PhD and which contributed not only to the individual’s personal development but also to the university as a whole. A School Manager stated: My research training during 2 years of my masters and then in PhD years has helped me in many ways. First of all I can look at every problem from a potential problem solving point of view rather than letting it weigh me down. I always see myself as the part of the solution and not as a part of the problem and more often than not, feel confident that with careful planning I will be able to find a way out and forward. Complementing personal effectiveness is a skill set which the Equity Officer labelled ‘emotional intelligence’ and which includes self-discipline, determination, motivation and resilience. ‘‘Finally, and perhaps more personally, I have reminded myself at particularly challenging times that my PhD was one of the most difficult things I have ever done and I did it successfully. It’s a good way of putting things back into proportion’’.
123
High Educ
Similar sentiments were expressed by a Commercialisation Manager: ‘‘The PhD taught me persistence and dedication to the task at hand on a given time-frame which is why I finished a high quality doctorate in record time’’. Moreover, he commented that he had taken intuitive thinking and logical decision making, skills which he rated highly from his PhD experience, first to a business research environment and later to the business world of sales and marketing and uses them daily in his current role. As the quotes in this section have demonstrated, the professional staff surveyed had undoubtedly demonstrated a practical understanding of the transferable nature of research skills to other work environments. Team-based collaborative work is a generic skill included in the Joint Skills Statement but not mentioned by these research trained professionals. This is perhaps not surprising as the Australian (Western et al. 2007) and international literature (Nerad et al. 2007; Aanerud et al. 2006) laments the absence of this and other generic skills from research training programmes. Further research would be necessary to determine whether this was because no one had acquired such skills during their PhD or because those skills were not needed in their professional roles. Research skills and techniques and research management The professional staff surveyed regularly utilized a variety of research skills and techniques developed during the course of their PhD. They had learnt to recognize problems and solve them in a methodological manner and they now adopted the same approach in their current roles. As School Manager related: The ability to make a clear analysis of the issue as presented and then to perform appropriate background research to relate the issue to the current environment are some of the value-adding that my training provides… This response was echoed by an IT Manager: I have found that the conceptual, investigative and analytical skills I gained from my research experience are very useful in resolving complex software, hardware and networking problems. A School Manager pointed out that an important part of her methodological approach entails taking into account both the big picture and the small detail; the underlying picture, not just the surface level. She and other School Managers said that they used this approach consistently when planning, beit for the budgeting, financial reporting, expenditure surveillance or audit. The lab and field experiments that I conducted over the years have trained me to look for the small critical and crucial details that are needed to ensure success to reach the final expected outcome. It has also given me an ability to see the big picture. A science-trained laboratory manager described how she used her research skills to institute more efficient processes: I have definitely used my research skills within my current position. I am not in the laboratory myself anymore but I am managing 3–4 laboratory staff—we recently improved one of our standard protocols by conducting a small ‘in-house’ experiment which involved designing an experiment that would allow us to test some new variables and shorten the protocol without compromising the outcome—especially to
123
High Educ
ensure we had included all appropriate controls and monitored the variables one by one. Although this is not research that will likely be published in any peer reviewed journal we certainly approached this task using high level research skills. These professionals regularly used their research skills to keep up with advances in their field and related areas. Their knowledge of how to undertake a complete review of the literature (including websites, data bases and statistics) was used for activities ranging from school reporting and planning through to marketing and the initiation and implementation of campus wide programmes. As one School Manager relayed: I think my training to do literature reviews must have had a very big impact on me as even today, I first like to have all the facts and data with me, find everything or as much as possible about the policies and procedures before taking action. Benchmarking with other institutions and programmes has become standard practice for many of these professionals. A Student Support Manager commented: I use my research skills to investigate best practice exemplars in other universities nationally and internationally. Being able to benchmark what we do with other universities is invaluable in ensuring that we are aspirational in the services that we provide and that we have a practice of continuous improvement…I notice that I am more focused on the ‘big picture’ than many of my colleagues because my research training makes me keen to stay well informed about current developments which may impact on the way we offer our programs. I will follow up on national reports, contact other researchers if I want more information and generally ask questions. The need for evidence-based decision making processes was recognised by these research trained professionals. A Graduate Education Officer commented that the support she provides to HDR students and their supervisors is underpinned by research. She not only reads the relevant literature and presents at conferences but also collects and analyses data that informs the way in which she works. Similarly a Business Manager commented that his training taught him how to make and support a case: My background means I look for evidence and how it supports or detracts from the case I wish to make. It makes arguing a case much easier and puts debate on a solid factual basis rather than emotional. This was certainly developed by research studies but also reinforced by my MBA. Moreover, the absence of data for evidenced-based decision making had even led a Postdoctoral Coordinator to generate her own sources. Her knowledge of international best practice in postdoctoral support was not enough—she wanted to hear from the institution’s postdoctoral researchers and to this end designed a comprehensive survey ‘‘…to provide hard evidence on the issues and needs of UWA post-doctoral scholars’’. These professionals transferred their mastery of specific research methodologies and techniques from their original research field to their new area of expertise. A social scientist explained how she was applying her fine-tuned interviewing techniques, developed during her PhD, to her role as Study Skills Advisor: ‘‘I am an excellent interviewer which is helpful in student consultations. I can usually ‘get to the bottom’ of a problem quickly’’. In a similar way, a Student Support Officer found that her training in interviewing as an oral historian had given her useful skills: ‘‘I speak to many students and staff in my role and sometimes they need to be questioned sensitively about something that has upset them or a problem that is having a negative impact’’. A Learning Skills Advisor
123
High Educ
demonstrated an appreciation of standards of good research practice in her discipline of Anthropology when she commented: ‘‘I know how to do effective research, so can advise students on the importance of consulting from the beginning those groups who are set to ‘benefit’ from, or are key stakeholders in, a research project’’. Completing a research project to PhD standards had provided those surveyed with the skills to efficiently and effectively manage projects of all shapes and sizes. As one Learning Skills Advisor wrote: More and more of my role is becoming project based (either due to funding arrangements or work cycles) and it is also how I choose to manage many of my core duties. Being able to set goals, manage timelines and deliver on performance indicators is something developed during a research degree that is now essential to my work. A Research Manager in a Co-operative Research Centre (CRC) similarly recognised the source of her organisational and project management skills as being her science-based PhD. ‘‘I discovered quite quickly that my science background contributed to this new position in a surprising number of ways….[for example]…In this job, I am able to rationalise large databases of information and draw relevant, high-level information from this data’’. Similarly, an IT Manager relayed: ‘‘I feel that I wouldn’t able to do what I’m doing without using the various skills from my PhD studies. I rely on my strong planning, organisational and self-management skills to manage and handle the heavy work load’’. Understanding the research environment Professional staff involved in research training and development considered their understanding of the national and international research environment to be essential to the successful execution of their roles. A Research Manager asserted that being academically trained in research has direct benefits to undertaking a research management role. By having first hand experience and an understanding of what it means to build a track record, to apply for research funding, to work with interdisciplinary teams and to collaborate with other publically funded research organisations such as CSIRO, leaves the professional research manager well equipped to develop research capability in any context. However, it wasn’t just the research managers and developers who maintained the importance of having an intimate knowledge of the context in which research takes place. A deep understanding of the culture of research in universities was raised as being crucial to their roles by many of the respondents. As the following quotes from a variety of professional staff indicate, shared understandings, rapport and trust that existed between these professional staff and their academic colleagues, based on common experiences of academia, was frequently raised as being vital to success in their roles: It’s hard to know if this is really the case, but my perception is that at least on first meeting, my having a PhD can make the researcher feel comfortable that they are speaking to someone on ‘‘their wavelength’’…. It can generate instant rapport. [Research Development Officer] …having been an academic and also a PhD student I can easily empathise with them and understand their frustration at the administrative systems, as I did exactly the same when I was an academic or a student’’. [School Manager]
123
High Educ
My research experience is also invaluable in helping me to understand the computing needs in an academic environment and to communicate with users at the same wavelength’’. [IT Manager] But even more than an understanding of research culture, these professionals believed that their experiences as postgraduates, postdocs and/or lecturers gave them credibility and validity, respect and status in the eyes of their academic colleagues. As one colleague related: ‘‘The PhD interestingly enough has given me enormous validity as a Manager—it is like I can be trusted more to have a better understanding of the academics’ position and needs within the school because I was one once’’. Similarly, a School Manager maintained that while an understanding of the research environment was essential …more significant…however, is the enabling aspect of the status conferred in this subculture by the PhD itself. Having spent some years observing, acting in and subsequently appointed to the School Manager role, my very strong impression is that School Managers with a PhD operate more autonomously and exert a more direct influence on outcomes where academic issues touch on business/financial matters…I have no doubt that I would be very much less effective in representing the School’s business/financial priorities if I did not hold a PhD; not because the degree confers any special expertise in these matters but because it provides a measure of protection against being sidelined on issues characterised as ‘matters for academic judgement’. On a related plane to credibility and status is respect; a Research Development Officer was adamant that respect for her track record in publishing and in attracting research funding was paramount to her building productive interactions with the researchers she develops: ‘‘I also think that if I didn’t have a PhD, a strong track record with grants and publications…and experience running a lab, then I’d have no weight with the researchers’’. Evidence that the perceptions of these staff reflected reality is illustrated by the experience of a School Manager who completed an M. Ed and is completing a PhD after the case was put to her that she was employed by an institution that valued and expected higher educational qualifications in its staff and that she may not be able to gain the full respect of the academic staff in the School unless she had further postgraduate education. The qualification of a PhD seems to have been a factor in the appointment of one of her colleagues too. ‘‘Certainly, the school manager who recruited me into the job share position with her always said I got the job more for my publication record than for anything else!’’ Some respondents, as the following quotes illustrate, identified the positive ways in which research trained, professional staff understandings of research culture in universities tends to provide for collegiality and can act as a bridge in the alleged ‘academic-general staff divide’. …one way in which I believe I contribute to the University as a whole is my knowledge of both sides, I can weigh up both sides of an argument or process and look for solutions in both directions- in some respects it is like being a translator between two very different worlds’’. [School Manager] …undertaking a research based PhD leads to an understanding of how the university works and more importantly, the effect of management practices on operations within the university. It is my observation that this understanding is often lacking in managers who have not previously worked within the university system…’’ [Scientific Officer]
123
High Educ
Having worked in both academic and general staff positions; in the latter on teaching and research projects, has provided me with a broad understanding and perspective of issues and challenges facing the university. I feel well equipped to work in the best interests of the university as a whole; not one particular area’’. [Research Development Manager] This [experience as a PhD and MBA student] keeps me in balance and always reminds me that the University has not been created to develop compliance systems but is here to create knowledge and future and the administrative systems have to be efficient to enable this to happen and also act as a custodian of the public money to get value for the investment made from tax payers money’’. [School Manager] The self perceptions of these professional staff bear striking resemblance to Collinson’s academically trained research administrators who tended to share academic culture and values (Collinson 2006) and to Whitchurch’s ‘cross boundary’ and ‘unbounded professionals’. Institutions will benefit from incorporating these ‘third space’ professionals who tend to operate more like their academic colleagues, ‘‘…facilitating perspectives and understandings that create new forms of institutional knowledge’’ (Whitchurch 2008, p. 383).
Discussion The results of this study not only provide insights into the value of research skills to staff working in professional roles but also lead us to wonder why, in the knowledge based economy, staff with research training are not in greater demand from the higher education sector. As we have seen, they bring a questioning and inquiring approach to the management and developmental side of academia. They identify inefficiencies or problems and apply their critical thinking skills to produce creative solutions and greater efficiencies. In a recent article in Campus Review, the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) at the Australian National University, Professor Mandy Thomas, promoted the generic value of the PhD when she pointed out that the senior management in the top 200 companies in Germany have PhDs (Ross 2008). Curiously, to date, the value of the PhD for professional staff in the higher education sector seems to be unrecognised. A current sampling of position descriptions from University HR websites for School and/or Business Manager, Research Manager and Developer, Student Support Manager and Developer, IT Support, Library and Information Services, Scientific Officer, and Business Liaison and Commercialisation positions revealed only one instance (Research Development Officer) in which the PhD was a prerequisite. It intrigues this team that universities, which promote the value of generic skills from research degrees to prospective research students and their employees, do not actively target the products of their own system for professional roles. There is a need for more research to investigate whether the use by research trained professional staff of their research and generic skills in their management roles to the benefit of the university is a widespread phenomena. Additional lines of further investigation could focus on whether the potential benefits of employing academically trained professional staff have simply not been realized or whether there structural reasons for this apparent undervaluing of the PhD by the very institutions that produce them. It is important here to clarify that we are certainly not suggesting making the PhD a prerequisite for all professional staff roles, either in universities or elsewhere. We recognize the broad benefits to universities of employing professional staff from a variety of
123
High Educ
backgrounds and experiences. Furthermore, the importance of non-formal and informal learning to lifelong learning is acknowledged (Watson 2003). However, the results of this project do suggest the advantages of consciously including research trained professional staff in this broader mix. Attraction of research trained professional staff is one side of the problem, retention is another. Current staff structures in Australia tend to recognize and reward general staff on the basis of their performance as measured against a predefined duty statement for a particular position rather than considering their overall contribution to the university, irrespective of their job classification (Coaldrake and Stedman 1999). The current system of salary progression and allowances is inadequate in that it does not cater for all staff in all circumstances. In the existing system, general staff usually have to change positions in order to gain promotion and progress their careers, leading to a significant loss of critical expertise. Limited access to promotion affects in particular those staff whose work focuses less on the management of budgets and staff and more on the generation, management and implementation of ideas, i.e. those whose roles focus on the provision of policy input and strategic initiatives. Moreover, the evidence from this study suggests that many of the staff in these positions are female, indicating that systemic barriers to the advancement of women in academia may exist not only for female academics (Dever et al. 2006) but for female professional staff too. Some of the staff interviewed for this project perceived that they are not fully valued. The following quote from a Manager of Animal Facilities is representative of a number of other unsolicited comments on the same theme: ‘‘In my view, this [academically trained professional staff] is an intangible resource that is not valued by academic institutions but has a high value placed in many parts of the business sector’’. The high response rate and depth of engagement with the survey question provides further evidence that these issues matter to research trained professional staff. The complex problem of how to reward professional staff on the basis of their performance and contribution to the university irrespective of their formal duty statement/job description is in the best interests not just of the staff concerned but also the university sector as a whole and thus merits further analysis. The global research environment is becoming more competitive. Fierce competition is being fuelled in the higher education sector by university ranking systems such as the Shanghai Jiao Tong Academic Ranking of World Universities, Times Higher Education World University Rankings, and Newsweek. Universities worldwide are vigorously developing strategies to increase their performance and hence their ranking and reputations (Marginson 2007a, b). In order to compete successfully in this environment, universities will have to utilize the potential of all staff; this means not only nurturing the best researchers but also retaining and appropriately rewarding the best professional staff too. Acknowledgments The authors are grateful to the respondents who generously set aside time to respond to our survey question.
References Aanerud, R., Homer, L., Nerad, M., & Cerny, J. (2006). Paths and perceptions. In P. L. Maki & N. A. Borkowski (Eds.), The assessment of doctoral education. Virginia: Stylus. Association for Tertiary Education Management (ATEM). (2001). The capacity of public universities to meet Australia’s higher education needs, Submission to Senate employment, workplace relations, small business and education references committee, 1–4. http://www.atem.edu.au/downloads/pdf/ submission-Public-unis-Meet-Aust-HE-Needs.pdf Accessed 7 May 2008.
123
High Educ Association of University Teachers (AUT). (2001). Building the academic team: A report on the contribution of academic-related staff to the delivery of higher education. London: Association of University Teachers. Brooks, I. (2008) Joan Chesney leads the charge for NPA’s postdoctoral core competencies. The POSTDOCket. 6(3):6. http://www.nationalpostdoc.org/atf/cf/%7B89152E81-F2CB-430C-B151-49D071AEB33E% 7D/POSTDOCket_Summer08.pdf Accessed 12 Dec 2008. Carpenter, S., & Stimpson, M. T. (2007). Professionalism, scholarly practice, and professional development in student affairs. NASPA Journal, 44(2), 165–284. Coaldrake P., & Stedman L. (1999). Academic work in the twenty-first century: changing roles and practice. Occasional paper series 99H. Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA). Collinson, J. A. (2006). Just ‘non-academics’? Work, Employment & Society, 20(2), 267–288. Collinson, J. A. (2007). ‘Get yourself some nice, neat, matching box files!’ Research administrators and occupational identity work. Studies in Higher Education, 32(3), 295–309. Dearing, R. (1997). Higher education in the learning society, report of the National Committee of inquiry into higher education. London: HMSO. Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). (2007). Students 2006 [full year]: selected higher education statistics. http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/publications_resources/profiles/ students_2006_selected_higher_education_statistics.htm Accessed 2 Nov 2007. Dever, M., Morrison, Z., Dalton, B., & Tayton, S. (2006). When research works for women: Report from the project. Melbourne: Monash University. Dobson, I. R. (2000). ‘Them and Us’–general and non-general staff in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 22(2), 203–210. Dobson, I., & Conway, M. (2003). Fear and Loathing in university staffing: The case of Australian academic and general staff. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 15(3), 123–133. Eveline, J. (2004). Ivory basement leadership: Power and invisibility in the changing university. Crawley, WA: University of Western Australia Press. Gornitzka, A., & Larsen, I. M. (2004). Towards professionalization? Restructuring of administrative work force in universities. Higher Education, 47, 455–457. Graduate Careers Australia. (2005). Postgraduate destinations 2004: The report of the Graduate Destinations Survey. Melbourne: Graduate Careers Council of Australia. Marginson, S. (2007a). Global position and position taking: The case of Australia. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(5), 5–32. Marginson, S. (2007b). Shanghai rankings set benchmark, Higher Education, The Australian, 28 Nov 2007: 31. Marginson refers to a paper by Ellen Hazelkorn presented at the Shanghai conference, 28–31 Oct 2007. Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The Enterprise University: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McInnis, C. (1998). Academics and professional administrators in Australian universities: Dissolving boundaries and new tensions. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 20(2), 161–173. Nerad, M., Rudd, E., Morrison, E., & Picciano, J. (2007). Social Science PhDs—five? years out: A national survey of PhDs in six fields—highlights report. CIRGE Report 2007-01. CIRGE: Seattle, WA. http://depts.washington.edu/cirgeweb/c/publications/142/ Accessed 12 Dec 2008. Research Council UK. (2001). Joint statement of skills training requirements of research postgraduates, http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/rescareer/rcdu/training.htm Accessed Jan 8th 2009. Rhoades, G., & Sporn, B. (2002). New models of management and shifting modes and costs of production: Europe and the United States. Tertiary Education and Management, 8, 3–28. Ross, J. (2008). A prescription for the economy: Doctorates, Campus Review, 19(35), 3. Schiermeirer, Q. (2005). Special report. Nature, 434, 540–541. Sim, J. (1998). Collecting and analysing qualitative data: Issues raised by the focus group. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(2), 345–352. Szekeres, J. (2006). General staff experiences in the corporate university. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 28(2), 133–145. Szerkes, J. (2004). The Invisible Workers. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 26(1), 7–22. Watson, L. (2003). Lifelong learning in Australia. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training. Western, M., Kubler, M., Western, J., Clague, D., Boreham, P., Laffan, W., & Lawson, A. (2007). PhD graduates 5 to 7 years out: Employment outcomes, job attributes and the quality of research training. Prepared for DEST: University of Queensland. What do PhDs do? – Trends. (2007). The UK Grad Programme, https://vitea.ac.uk/cms/files/ UKGRAD-WDPD-Trends-Sep-2007.pdf. Accessed 2 Dec 2008.
123
High Educ Whitchurch, C. (2006a). Professional managers in UK higher education: Preparing for complex futures. Interim report, London: Leadership foundation of higher education, research and development series, 1–23. http://www.lfhe.ac.uk/publications/research.html Accessed March 2008. Whitchurch, C. (2008). Beyond administration and management: reconstructing the identities of professional staff in UK higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 30(4), 375– 386.
123
