Skip to navigation | Skip to main content | Skip to footer

Recent news

Valuing our staff

(9 October 2017)

As reported back in June the Staff Survey 2017 results were generally very positive, particularly in areas relating to overall job satisfaction and buy-in to University goals and values. However, there are still areas which need improving.

In addition to the University themes of dignity at work and change management, highlighted as requiring attention in the light of the University survey results, the following Faculty themes have also been identified:

  • communication;
  • workload and work/life balance;
  • the need to value teaching staff.

The Faculty has also identified much more adverse results for academic staff than for PSS staff under certain headings. The main examples include: work-life balance, how well we value teaching staff, recommending the University to friends as a place to work and views on the pay and benefits package.

Although there are some measures for addressing these findings in the initial iteration of the Faculty action plan, the Senior Management Team is keen to take a different approach to addressing the overall issue of staff engagement and morale.

Andrew Mullen, the Faculty’s Staff Survey Lead, said: “We will be talking to and listening to staff, and gaining buy-in and support from colleagues in taking forward our action planning. Notwithstanding the overall positive headlines, our sense is that too many colleagues view the action planning process as little more than a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise - or, worse still, simply don’t notice it all! So, this time we aim to try a different tack on the basis that using the same sort of approach as following the 2013 and 2015 surveys is likely to have little impact in those areas that require improvement.

“As such we plan to develop and implement an engagement strategy which involves a much wider pool of colleagues in identifying, developing and owning actions more effectively. As part of this approach, the action plan will still provide a means of setting out measures taken under each heading and as a reference point for evaluating the impact after the next survey. However, the Faculty aims to communicate more effectively the actions identified, how and why they were developed and their impact in addressing areas requiring improvement.”