European Commission

This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 824544

This website reflects only the author's view and that the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Transparent power: on how appointments and assignments are appointed at the Faculty of Social Sciences

Submitted by: Nina Almgren, Uppsala University

–

Transparent power: on how appointments and assignments are appointed at the Faculty of Social Sciences

The Equal Opportunities Committee at the Faculty of Social Sciences has carried out a project looking into how different positions of trust are filled within the faculty. The report includes suggestions for measures and reflections for departments, the University as a whole, and for individual senior researchers. 

In the report entitled Transparent power: how appointments and positions of trust are filled at the Faculty of Social Sciences, author Signe Jernberg, a visiting researcher at the Department of Business Studies and senior lecturer at the University of Gävle, examines how filling different positions of trust occurs. The report describes a situation where positions of trust are often filled in an informal process where the heads of department are in a hurry to fill the positions and often ask the individual they know will accept. These positions are often filled without all staff being aware of the need and without any discussion with regard to the position and its format.

The author of the report argues that positions of trust should not only be seen as a qualification nor as a negative move for the individual’s career but as an important part of collegiality. 

According to Linda Wedlin, chair of the Equal Opportunities Committee at the Faculty of Social Sciences, the faculty needs to work on two different fronts to develop equal opportunities work when it comes to filling positions of trust. On the one hand, the faculty needs to increase awareness of the positions and their function as part of collegiality and, on the other hand, the faculty needs to make the positions more attractive by strengthening the qualifications acquired in positions of trust.

These are questions that naturally come up in discussions in the Faculty’s recruitment groups and the hope is that the Equal Opportunities Committee and the report will be able to contribute to these discussions.

COMPASS PERSPECTIVE – in what way(s) was the measure C O M P A S S?

C - because aligning with and strengthening fundamental principles at the University. Thinking inside the box can benefit creativity. Collegial influence and meritocracy play a central role in the organization. 

O - the project is about making processes for appointments and assignments transparent, open and participatory.

M - the author of the report concludes that the current meritocracy system in universities where talent and performance are vital for career development is dependent on getting it right from the outset. “If any group is discriminated against or favoured early in their careers, this will be reproduced in their careers moving forward, even in a functional meritocracy. The fact that there are injustices among senior academics is something that, to a certain extent, needs to be accepted. The alternative is quota systems that are not consistent with the principles of merit and skill. What is possible though is to strive for a just and fair meritocracy from the outset.”

P - one of the author’s points of departure for the suggestions and reflections from the report is the following: “An organisation can never be exclusively a formal structure. For there to be order, organisational processes are also needed. Therefore, in suggesting improvement measures there should be a focus on balancing formal structure with scope for processes to continue, and for both structure and processes to recognise the risk of actions and decisions happening on non-objective grounds.”

ACTORS AND STAKEHOLDERS

The Faculty of Social Sciences:

  • Equal Opportunities Committee
  • Head of Departments and employees
  • HR Division

AUTHOR’S REFLECTIONS

What would you do the same/differently another time?
What have you learnt? Do you see relevance for this in other contexts?

Suggestions for departments
• Hold a discussion at the departments on the content of positions of trust. To ensure more individuals will be suitable, new forms of collaboration and descriptions of the positions may be relevant.
• Resist the tendency to ask those who you know will accept the position.
• Keep individuals in mind who do not speak Swedish for positions that can be performed in English and reflect on when Swedish is actually required.
• Make it clear to everyone at the department what positions of trust there are.

Reflection on the University’s responsibility
“To a greater extent, recruitments and promotions should be steered towards evaluating applicants as complete academics where teaching and research qualifications are given the most weight but where collegial engagement contributes to making the person a complete academic. Here, evaluating qualifications with a focus on research and teaching qualifications is maintained for appointments and promotions but they are evaluated in quantity and quality in relation to academic age and taking into consideration collegial work.” 

Reflection on how the work between professors and doctoral students can influence future meritocracy functions
“Working to ensure that doctoral students get equal opportunities to get teaching assignments, to participate in working groups, to be given positions of trust within the research faculty is key to building the foundations for a well-functioning meritocracy. Selection based on homosocial processes seems to occur more frequently here in particular. However, being fair in this instance is not only about giving everyone opportunities but also about doctoral students being schooled in how academia, qualifications and collegiality function. It is not possible to claim that it is a fair system if doctoral students don’t know the rules of the game.”

We have learnt that the merit systems and the special nature that otherwise resides in the universities mean that equal opportunities issues need to be considered through, and they need to be more clearly related to the core activities in which they have their context.