Want more background on SAM?
Please visit �the SAM Sundog �page for more information
Sundog Home ➝ �Our Org➝ INITIATIVES➝ Scientific Appointment Modernization (SAM)
sam_questions@ucar.edu
Design Phase Update
Scientific Appointments Modernization (SAM)
September 2022
Design Phase Updates
This material is based upon work supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement No. 1852977.
Join at slido.com�#171303
What are we doing today?
Presenting findings and a set of high-level recommendations for modernizing the scientific appointment system
Answering your questions and soliciting your feedback through an online survey
Leadership has not decided how to respond to these recommendations
Your feedback will be considered by leadership when evaluating these recommendations
Feasibility study will be needed
What happens next?
We will be presenting a set of high-level recommendations for modernizing the scientific appointment system
An implementation team will develop formal policies once leadership decides how to move forward
Briefings with leadership
Incorporate feedback from staff and leadership into final recommendations
Undertake feasibility study of final recommendations and develop and implementation plan with subject matter experts
There will be continuing opportunities for staff and stakeholder engagement and feedback
Implementation planning for any recommendations that leadership moves forward with would include proposed policies and procedures and a fiscal plan
Presentation overview
Project objectives: The committee’s charge
Why SAM?
The current landscape
Findings and recommendations
Q&A and survey
Where we are in the SAM process
SAM objectives: The committee’s charge
1
2
3
4
5
Provide clear definitions and expectations for scientific categories/positions within a structure that is adaptable and extensible to the varying and evolving priorities of scientists and the organization.
Provide equitable, consistent, and clearly defined performance and advancement evaluation criteria for all scientific staff that acknowledge and reward a wide array of contributions to individual, team, and mission-driven objectives.
Develop an appointment system that provides all scientific staff opportunities for growth, mobility, and leadership across all career stages.
Develop a system that fosters and supports diversity, equity, and inclusivity in the scientific workforce.
Develop an agile system that enables organizational responsiveness to internal and external opportunities that support NCAR and UCP strategic priorities via policies, processes, and resource allocation.
Data-informed, staff-led process
Where we are in the process
Staff Engagement
Staff Surveys
Upcoming Recommendation
External Data
Internal Data
Co-Design �Team
Leadership
(AS, PS, LT scientists & Admins)
Where we are in the process
Project schedule overview
We are here!
After more than a year of work and staff engagement, we are presenting draft recommendations.
Where we are in the process
Project schedule overview
We are here!
After more than a year of work and staff engagement, we are presenting draft recommendations.
Next step:
A feasibility study with subject matter expertise on the team
Why SAM?
The workforce of the future
SAM is part of an effort to prepare for and build the future scientific workforce that will drive the cutting edge, community-focused science necessary to advance our fields.
Act now |
No regrets and bets |
Make a bigger leap |
Own the automation debate |
People not jobs |
Build a clear narrative |
Key messages for leaders:
PWC Workforce of the Future (2017)
Collaboration, team-oriented, interdisciplinary
Each team member may play a variety of roles and have a variety of skills in order to work effectively on multiple teams
Less silos, more partnerships
Tomorrow’s workforce:
The current landscape
We currently have multiple scientific job categories
Position Type | Minimum qualifications | Funding Requirements | Promotion process |
Ladder Track (LT) Scientist & Research Engineers | requires PhD | at least 25% base funding required for a new hire | ARG* (tenure-like process) for II-III and III-IV, up or out timeline for I-II, II-III |
Project Scientist (PS) | requires PhD | no requirements on funding source, typically soft-funded | No set timeline, committee review for II-III or III-IV |
Associate Scientist (AS) | BS or higher degree | no requirements on funding source | No set process or timeline |
Emerging discipline positions (EDP) e.g., Machine Learning Scientist | Depends on position | Depends on position | Depends on position |
*ARG = Appointments Review Group
The current landscape
Position trends
NCAR has moved from LT dominated to PS dominated with a overall decrease in AS
The current landscape
Breakdown of scientists by family and level
Ladder track
Project scientists
Associate scientists
The current landscape
Duties by job family & career stage
While there is considerable variability in the job duties of individual scientists in each track (ladder track, project scientists, and associate scientists), there are also general similarities across tracks. *Based on staff input on SAM job duties survey
By job track
By career stage
All three categories participate in project management and scientific communication roles at similar levels
Ladder track and project scientists have very similar job duties profiles across the spectrum
Fraction of time dedicated to research declines as career stages advances
Later career stage scientists spend more time on organizational management and supervisory responsibilities
The current landscape
Funding profile
Ladder track scientists are mainly base funding
Project scientists are mainly non-base funding
Associate scientists are mainly non-base funding
The current landscape
Disparity in Feeling Opportunity to Succeed
Positive
Neutral
Negative
Results from the Workplace Culture Survey
Benefits Theme ➡ Findings
�
�
2
3
1
4
�
�
Benefits Theme ➡ Findings
2
3
1
4
“There is no reason why employees across the organization should not have access to the same benefits”
Ideation listening session feedback
Benefits ideas were widely supported, with a focus on improving equity, retention, and morale, as well as supporting mobility between tracks and jobs.
To promote equity and inclusion, scientific staff should have equitable access to UCAR-provided benefits, such as PTO, sabbatical leave, severance pay, and emeritus status
To provide opportunities for growth, mobility, and leadership, the organization should increase opportunities for scientific staff mobility, both internally and externally
To support more mobility and agility for staff opportunities, new ways to manage scientific staff across a variety of funding sources, projects, programs, entities, and organizations should be adopted
Overarching principle: Create new opportunities for growth and equitable benefits for scientific staff
Benefits Theme ➡ Recommendations
Promotion Process Theme ➡ Findings
2
3
1
4
5
To reward a wide array of contributions, promotion criteria should be modernized to recognize a broader variety of accomplishments and contributions
To promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, the promotion process should be consistently applied and based upon merits and not set by specific timelines.
To provide clear and consistent advancement criteria, a uniformly-applied �promotion readiness panel should review all scientific staff at regular intervals �to assess their readiness for promotion
To maintain scientific excellence ,a modernized promotion review board should be used to promote scientists into upper levels
Overarching principle: Ensure a consistent, merit-based promotion process for all scientists to achieve scientific excellence
Promotion Process Theme ➡ Recommendations
Funding Theme ➡ Findings
2
1
3
4
5
To provide organizational agility and more hiring flexibility, the source of funding should be decoupled from requirements for specific job tracks
To provide better continuity of funds/job security for well-performing scientists, a strategy for gap funding for primarily soft-funded scientific staff should be identified
To support more mobility and agility for scientific staff opportunities, new ways to manage scientific staff across a variety of funding sources, projects, programs, entities, and organizations should be adopted
Overarching principle: Remove limiting barriers that may exist in providing career opportunities and more continuity to scientific staff.
Funding Theme ➡ Recommendations
Appointment Structure Theme ➡ Findings
2
3
1
4
PROS
CONCERNS
Appointment Structure Theme ➡ Findings
Listening session survey regarding…
SINGLE TRACK �appointment idea
2-TRACK �appointment idea
PROS
CONCERNS
Help address equity issues, including salary and benefit disparities, and improve morale.
Addresses equity while accommodating ambitions and preferences and providing flexibility
Difficult to implement and could change our culture (not necessarily a bad thing). Could lower the prestige and benefits of a LT position.
AS would be excluded from reforms if only PS/LT combined, supports current culture of hierarchy between PhD and non-PhD scientists, would not correct problems of current 3-track system
To develop a system that is adaptable and extensible and that promotes equity, a single track appointment structure should be adopted
Overarching principle: The SAM objectives and recommendations indicate improvements need to be made to the appointment structure
Appointment Structure Theme ➡ Recommendations
To develop a system that is adaptable and extensible and that promotes equity, a single track appointment structure should be adopted
Overarching principle: The SAM objectives and recommendations indicate improvements need to be made to the appointment structure
How are staff mapped into a single track from the existing structure?
How many levels should be in this single track?
How would all the various roles and/or career paths a scientist may take be reflected under this single track structure?
What would the job matrix for this single track look like?
Appointment Structure Theme ➡ Recommendations
A Single Track System is a Big Change
Make a Bigger Leap
“Don’t be constrained by your starting point. You might need a more radical change than just a small step away from where you are today.”
PWC Workforce of the Future 2017 report
SAM Outcomes
The SAM objectives and recommendations will:
Recommendations summary
provide equitable access to UCAR-provided benefits
increase opportunities for scientific staff mobility
adopt new ways to manage scientific staff across a variety of funding sources
modernize promotion criteria
promotion process based upon merits and not specific timelines
modern promotion review board for upper levels
decouple the funding source from requirements for specific job tracks
identify a strategy for gap funding for primarily soft-funded staff
adopt a single track appointment structure
uniformly applied promotion readiness panel
Next steps
Survey: https://tinyurl.com/SAMRecommendationsSurvey
Your feedback
First we will collect your feedback on these recommendations via the SAM recommendations survey
Final report
Next the SAM Co-Design Team will meet again to consider your feedback and begin assembling final report
At the end of October the Co-Design Team will deliver the final report to NCAR and UCP leadership
Deliver to leadership
Feasibility + Implementation
Then work on feasibility assessment along with implementation will begin
Thanks
Co Design Team
Core Team
Kristen Aponte
LuAnna Allapowa
Tracey Baldwin
Cam Brinkworth
Cindy Bruyere
Veronica Burris
Chelsea Castellano
Tom Cordova
Michelle Darveau
Jeff Dykstra
Joanne Graham
Julie Kramer
Joel Lampe
Hanne Mauriello
Scott McIntosh
Charlie Mitchell
Heidi Perman
Konnie Philips
Ben Neeser
Glen Romine
Eric Apel
Mausumi Dikpati
Ben Johnson
Amy Knack
Paul Kucera
Scott Landolt
Maria Molina
Matthew Paulus
Roy Rasmussen
May Wong
Audience Q&A Session
ⓘ Start presenting to display the audience questions on this slide.
Recommendations summary
To promote equity and inclusion, scientific staff should have equitable access to UCAR-provided benefits, such as PTO, sabbatical leave, severance pay, and emeritus status
To provide opportunities for growth, mobility, and leadership, the organization should increase opportunities for staff mobility, both internally and externally
To support more mobility and agility for staff opportunities, new ways to manage staff across a variety of funding sources, projects, programs, entities, and organizations should be adopted
To reward a wide array of contributions, promotion criteria should be modernized to recognize a broader variety of accomplishments and contributions
To promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, the promotion process should be consistently applied and based upon merits and not set by specific timelines.
To maintain scientific excellence, a modernized promotion review board should be used to promote scientists into upper levels
To provide clear and consistent advancement criteria, a uniformly-applied promotion readiness panel should review when staff are ready for promotion (at all levels) at certain time intervals
To provide organizational agility and more hiring �flexibility, the source of funding should be decoupled �from requirements for specific job tracks
To provide better continuity of funds/job security for well-performing scientists, a strategy for gap funding for primarily soft-funded staff should be identified
To develop a system that is adaptable and extensible, a single track appointment structure should be adopted