University Executive Board minutes - 2 May 2023

On

Date:

2 May 2023

Present:

Professor K Lamberts (KL) (in the Chair), Professor A Blom (AB), Professor J Derrick (JD), Professor S Fitzmaurice (SF), Professor S Hartley (SH), J Jones (JJ), Professor J Litster (JL), R Sykes (RS), Professor G Valentine (GV), Professor M Vincent (MV), I Wright (IW)

In attendance:

J Strachan (JS), T Wray (TW); Dr M Butler (MB) and L Carlile (LC) (item 1); A Carlile (AC) and K Burden (KB) (item 2); D Lodge (DL) (item 3)

Apologies:

Professor C Watkins (CW),

Secretary:

D Swinn

  1. Student Recruitment update

    • (MB and LC in attendance for this item)

    • UEB discussed an update on the latest applications for 2023 entry and a range of recruitment and marketing activities. It was pleasing to note the success of the City Campaign, in conjunction with 91Ö±²¥ Hallam, which was regarded as an innovative approach that was generating significant interest. Attention was drawn to efforts to reinforce overseas student recruitment.

  2. Business Intelligence Plan and Objectives

    • (AC and KB in attendance for this item)

    • UEB considered proposals for the future direction of the University’s Business intelligence function after the end of the Data Warehouse Project and an accompanying roadmap that set out key areas of work for the next 12-18 months. UEB approved the BI and Reporting plan and the roadmap of work, as set out in the related papers.

  3. Review of Research Entities

    • (DL in attendance for this item)

    • UEB considered a report and update on a detailed review of the University’s research entities, which followed the adoption of a well-received institutional definition of research excellence and subsequent discussion about the characteristics of an effective research entity. Attention was drawn to the process that had been followed, led by the Research Excellence Working Group and the key findings which had informed a series of recommendations, with proposals centred around designations, support packages, governance communications and the future status and funding for the existing Flagships

    • During discussion, in which UEB welcomed the review and report, Members noted the following:

      • It was important that the agreed nomenclature did not inadvertently create additional layers of structure and bureaucracy.

      • Existing URCs should be reviewed against the proposed criteria.

      • A detailed review of all research entities, including the existing flagships, would take place during 2023/24, with consideration of those which could or would become self-sustaining

      • The process of setting up URCs could be supplemented by the inclusion of timescales.

      • Prioritisation on the basis of excellence and opportunity, aligned with strategic objectives, was welcomed.

      • Effective leadership, and succession planning, was an essential consideration and was a criterion in the new review and set-up process.

      • The review had focused on internally supported centres rather than those which were already funded externally, a status to which centres would be encouraged to aim for. This would also enable Research Services to prioritise and target funding applications and wider research support.

      • FVPs would have a key role in identifying which entities should be prioritised for resources.

      • Where it was agreed that an area of activity would be stopped then additional support may be needed for HoDs, and any such decision should not be perceived as a failure but the result of changed priorities and opportunities.

    • UEB approved the recommendations as set out in the paper with a small number of amendments and added clarifications and additions.

  4. Report of the UEB Information Management & Security Group

    • UEB approved the report, including the Digital Preservation Policy. UEB also noted IMSG’s support for work to agree a prioritised list of information management compliance activities, with particular regard to legal and regulatory compliance. With respect to the latter, Members noted the importance of UEB advocacy to support communications about institutional policy and guidance.

  5. Report of the UEB International Steering Group   

    • UEB approved the report, including proposals regarding the Turing Scheme, and discussion of potential government policy in relation to Confucius Institutes, although any risk to the University in this regard was deemed to be low.

  6. Round Table

    • Industrial Action: UEB considered the University’s approach to mitigating the impact of the UCU marking and assessment boycott, noting how this was addressed during the previous boycott. The principal aim was to ensure that students were able to graduate as planned and Members reported actions in train to facilitate this. UEB also discussed how the University would implement its policy of deducting pay from participants in the boycott for partial performance; guidance would continue to be provided to HoDs in relation both to ensuring that marking could be completed and to pay deductions. It was also reported that the current government guidance around pay deductions for action short of a strike had not been updated to reflect hybrid ways of working since the pandemic and, as such, the University’s approach was lawful and proportionate.

    • Post Offer Experience Day: RS reported that a small group had been set up to undertake contingency planning. 

    • Natural Environmental Research Council: SH reported on a recent visit from the Chief Executive which had highlighted a number of areas of opportunity for the University.

    • SYCMA Mayor: KL reported a scheduled telephone call with Oliver Coppard.