Research

Impact

Leadership Team Spirit

Education

Outcomes of Dialogue Sessions on Recognition & Rewards

June 2021

Overview of the dialogue sessions• 4 dialogue sessions Tilburg School of Catholic Theology (starting lecturers, PhD candidates, full professors,

assistant and associate professors)• 5 dialogue sessions Tilburg Law School (PhD candidates, assistant professors/post-doctoral researchers,

full professors/associate professors, PhD candidates/post-doctoral researchers, full professors/associate professors)

• 5 dialogue sessions Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences (assistant professors with a permanent appointment, full professors/associate professors, assistant professors in tenure track, PhD candidates/post-doctoral researchers, lecturers with a temporary contract)

• 5 dialogue sessions Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences (PhD candidates/post-doctoral researchers, full professors, assistant professors/associate professors, lecturers/ assistant professors/associate professors, Research Advisory Board)

• 5 dialogue sessions Tilburg School of Economics and Management (Heads of Departments, assistant professors, associate professors, lecturers, full professors)

Education

Impact

Research

Research and education form the foundation for all academic careers, strengthened by leadership and team spirit. Individuals may excel in di�erent key areas.

Team SpiritLeadership

1

Introduction

In the period January through April 2021, dialogue sessions were organized within the Tilburg University Schools about the ideas and intentions of Recognition & Rewards. This in response to the Tilburg University vision as expressed in Room for Everyone's Talent: The Tilburg University Ambition. There was much enthusiasm and a warm welcome for the ideas of more attention for talent development and more room for differentiation in one's own career according to one's own preferences and strengths. A differentiation that is made possible by recognizing five core domains: education, research, societal impact, leadership, and team spirit. Everyone remains active in education and research, but the accents across the five domains may differ per person and per position and may be subject to change during a person’s career.

Naturally, there were also many questions and critical comments. These related mainly to the facilitation of talent development, concretization of the core domains and associated assessment criteria, alignment between indivi-dual and team interests, the importance of maintaining the international position, and transfer opportunities to universities elsewhere. Below, we provide an overview of the responses and the concrete suggestions.

The dialogue sessions all took place online. Although not ideal, this setup did not detract from the engage-ment and enthusiasm of the participants. The sessions produced many suggestions for concrete solutions. The sessions were usually organized by job category to do justice to the varying perspectives and importance per job category when it comes to recognition and rewards in the five core domains. This worked well with a lot of room to express ideas, suggestions, and criticism from every section. What was noticeable is that many areas of con-cern came back in different sessions within different Schools. In this document, we present the main outcomes. In addition, there were specific points of interest for each School. These points are not included here, but will be passed on to the MTs of the Schools by the Steering Committee.

In addition to the dialogue sessions, the Steering Committee also met with the University Council, the Labor Representation Board, the Tilburg PhD Platform (TiPP), and the Tilburg Young Academy. The input from these conversations will also be included in the recommendations formulated by the Steering Committee. Now that the results of the dialogue sessions have been collected, the Steering Committee will also once again enter into discussions with the participation bodies.

In addition to a classification of the input by core domain—research, education, societal impact, leadership, and team spirit—this document also includes a classification by theme. The themes set out emerged explicitly in the various dialogue sessions. The first theme—the PhD process—was of course reflected upon in the sessions with PhD candidates, but the PhD process also emerged as a point for attention in other sessions.

Where do we go from here?For the Recognition & Rewards Steering Committee, these reactions are important input for further policy deve-lopment. The Steering Committee will—partly based on the outcomes of the dialogue sessions and the findings of the working groups in the core areas—come up with recommendations before the summer that will be presen-ted to the Executive Board and the Deans. These recommendations will form input for the Tilburg University Stra-tegy for the period 2022–2027. Further concretization—also in the form of information, instruction, and training sessions for executives—will thus follow after the summer.

We hope you enjoy the read and invite you to send us additions or comments. You can do so via recognitionandre-wards@tilburguniversity.edu. More information about the activities of the Recognition & Rewards Steering Com-mittee and the subsequent steps can be found at: www.tilburguniversity.edu/recognitionandrewards.

Jaap Paauwe, Chair Recognition & Rewards Steering Committee

Elke van Cassel, Program Manager for Recognition & Rewards

2

1. Classification by domain

Research

“For research, you need to have a certain basic level of experience to be able to contribute to science.”

"Open Science deserves more recognition. Open Science takes more time, but it makes research more accessible."

"There is more recognition for individual paper writing, while multidisciplinary research is also important and deserves more recognition."

• Greater recognition of the time involved in data collection as part of the research process. This takes a lot of time. Not just appreciation for the end result, but for the entire process.

• Different ways and methods of doing research should be appreciated.• Increased recognition of Open Science by providing people with education on Open Science and by appointing

Open Science ambassadors (role models).• More recognition for collaboration and multidisciplinarity in research. Current system discourages

collaboration (fewer points for joint publications), whereas multidisciplinarity and collaboration in research should be encouraged.

• What is Tilburg University's view of "What makes someone a good researcher?”• Why does only a full professor have the right to confer doctoral degrees? This creates a brake on initiating one's

own projects. An assistant or associate professor has sufficient capacities to supervise PhD projects. As a co-supervisor, you do a large part of the work, but formal recognition or appreciation is lacking.

• More attention should be paid to research quality and relevance. This can be assessed by reading publications rather than just counting them.

• Not everyone should be raising funding. Applying for (large) grants should be a team effort.• What is the difference between an individual-level and group-level evaluation? How do these relate to each

other? In terms of research, we should evaluate at the group level rather than at the individual level.

Concrete suggestions • Put more effort into the Open Science community and multidisciplinary collaboration in research. Through

shared meetings among the various departments, knowledge can be shared and recognition can be expressed.• During the evaluation, do not only look at the quantity but also at the relevance and level of innovation of the research. • Establish an evaluation system that evaluates at the group level rather than the individual level.

Education

We need better ways to measure teaching performance.”

“Education is very important within the department, but when it comes to promotion decisions the focus is on research. There is a disconnect there.”

• The University Teaching Qualification (UTQ) should be accessible to PhD candidates. • Increased focus on educational innovation.• Develop a new system to evaluate education (performance) more broadly, than just student evaluations. This

system could be supplemented by peer review.• More collaboration in the field of education. More thinking in teams, consisting of structured consultations

between lecturers.

3

• It is important to distribute education tasks fairly and to recognize education more so that it is no longer seen as an obstacle to research.

• The question is: What are the minimum requirements for staff on permanent contracts, in terms of both education and research? What do we require in terms of performance in education from the more research-oriented staff?

• There needs to be more clarity on career paths for those who are primarily engaged in education. There should always be a research component to these careers in education as well.

• Should we always require a PhD for those who are going to focus on education?• How do we differentiate the university teacher training program from that at the university of applied sciences?

Concrete suggestions • Develop an assessment system that is broader than just student evaluations, e.g., supplemented by peer

review: evaluation, assessment, and feedback from peers.• Organize more collaboration in teams through structured consultations between lecturers.• Enable an academic career within the university with specialization in education and room for building

experience and educational innovation.

Impact

“The link with society is very important, but so is fundamental research, which can also generate new insights for society. We need both,

but there is some catching up to do in the more practice-drive research.”

• Definition of impact is still unclear. • Social media and outreach should be recognized as part of impact.• Impact takes a lot of time and energy, and establishing and maintaining contacts often takes several years.

Therefore, it cannot be measured over one year in a Performance & Talent Development (PTD) interview.• More recognition for socially relevant output (and not just purely scientific publications).• Greater recognition of research output that is not in Web of Science. Include activities that have societal impact

or knowledge sharing as a goal. • A choice for impact should not come at the expense of research and its associated career prospects. • The right infrastructure and support is needed to support development on impact.• Creating impact begins with the choice of research questions. Research questions with high research and social

relevance automatically generate impact.• Measuring impact at the individual level is difficult and this should be assessed at the group level and not only

at individual level.• The university should not become too dependent on social partners in creating impact. The university must

remain an independent body.

Concrete suggestions • Impact takes a lot of time and energy, and making and maintaining contacts often involves several years, which

cannot be measured in a single year in a Performance & Talent Development (PTD) interview.• Account for the social and societal impact of the research when preparing research proposals.

Leadership

“Managers should be better trained to supervise, guide, direct and help colleagues in their development.”

• More recognition and appreciation for leadership tasks. How do we ensure that these tasks are no longer seen as "chores"?

• Make the different leadership roles more explicit. • Provide a rotation in leadership and management roles.

4

• Establish criteria and behavioral indicators for leadership using the UFO profiles. Agree on definitions per domain with the organization.

• More focus on leaders for the future. Leadership is a skill that can be learned.• Introducing a mentoring system where senior colleagues coach junior colleagues to help them find their way. In

the area of education-related tasks, it can help people save time and set realistic goals. In the field of research, it can provide the opportunity to get involved in collaborations. These tasks should be rewarded, i.e., time should be allocated for them.

Concrete suggestions• Develop a Toolbox to support HR policies (e.g., recruitment, selection, and promotion decisions).• Rotate leadership roles so that everyone can gain leadership experience.• Align the criteria for good leadership with the ideas of Connected Leading. • Introduce a mentoring system in which senior colleagues mentor junior colleagues. This should not be on a

voluntary basis, and therefore, it should be rewarded.

Team Spirit

"Let's not just look at individuals, but at the faculty and community as a whole."

“We should work together more as a team. Recognize each other’s strengths and work together.The department will benefit from this as well.”

"Recognizing and valuing team spirit and leadership is important, so the gap between choicesfor one's own career and the common good becomes smaller."

• What is the definition of a team?• Establish clear criteria for team spirit and provide tools for this. • Agree on a baseline: What do we expect from everyone in terms of team spirit? Establish/formulate clear team

goals as a team and execute them as a team. Create a culture of teamwork and collaboration.• Tension between individual and team perspective. Maximize the potential of the team as a whole rather than

just looking at the talent of the individual. • At the level of the Department, divide the teamwork: divide tasks and focus on collaboration.• Recognize the team effort as a whole instead of just the coordinator. • Include team spirit and leadership in Performance & Talent Development (PTD) interviews: broader evaluation.• More attention and recognition for team performance, from individual assessment to being assessed as a

team.• Team spirit is not only assessed by the manager but also by the team. Assess team spirit by means of

360-degree feedback. This involves asking about the strengths and areas for improvement of, for example, by a subordinate, an equal, and a superior.

• Vacancies should depend on what is needed and what the needs of the team/Department are. Integrate this into the recruitment & selection of new colleagues in a team.

• Encourage interdisciplinary collaboration among Schools.

Concrete suggestions• Give direct colleagues feedback by means of 360-degree feedback. In this way, you can have team spirit

assessed by the entire team and not just by the manager. • Express team spirit in the form of criteria; this domain is now somewhat abstract. These criteria can be drawn

up based on the UFO profiles.

5

2. Classification by theme

PhD Program

“I do not feel that there is a place for me in academia because we have to excel in every field. Why does it all have to be excellent?”

“There should be more attention for the growth you show within your PhD trajectory. The focus is now on criteria for end results, not on what you have learned.”

• PhD candidates find it difficult to allocate their time. On the one hand, enough time for research and working on their thesis. On the other hand, they also want to explore different domains and talents. There should be room for individual differentiation.

• Diversification is important for further career, but leads to delay and is discouraged for that reason.• More room for developing soft skills. There is a mismatch now between the qualities that are relevant to the

future career of PhD candidates and the qualities that are developed in the PhD program.• Room for diversification depends on the supervisor.• PhD candidates are eager to contribute to society and make an impact. • Offer possibility to obtain University Teaching Qualification (UTQ) during the PhD program, and also receive

space/time for this within the contract. • Possibility for more flexibility in contracts for PhD candidates. For example, 30% education duties instead of

10% education. • Make it possible for PhD candidates to explore different tasks and domains. PhD program should be a

“learning experience.”• More attention to the development process of a PhD candidate instead of only focusing on the end result. • Prepare PhD candidates well for the job market, both inside and outside the academia. • Develop a mentoring system for PhD candidates where they can go with their questions, ambitions, and career plans.• More room for education, look for synergy between education and research.• There is great uncertainty about the future and job security after the PhD program. There is also high pressure

to excel in all areas.

Concrete suggestions• Offer opportunities to explore different domains to develop various talents and skills.• Provide the opportunity to obtain a University Teaching Qualification (UTQ) during the PhD program.• Focus more on the development process of a PhD candidate instead of only focusing on the end result (the

doctoral thesis).

Differentiation and Switch

“There is currently only one highway within the university. If you deviate from that one track, there is no alternative. It would be nice if there were multiple roads you can take,

that you do not end up by the side of the road if you do not take the highway.”

• When is the choice made in which domain to excel?• It is important that attention is paid to shifting emphases and priorities throughout someone’s career. • Ensure that the different career paths are "equal" in terms of evaluation, attractiveness, and appreciation (in the

interest of gender perspective). • How do you get back to the same level after switching from one domain to another? It is important that

everyone continues to have feeling with the different domains. • The switch must fit into the overall picture of the team. What does the individual want and what does the team

(and the organization) need? A departmental level strategy is needed.

6

• Differentiation is possible only after obtaining tenure.• As the career progresses, impact and leadership become more important, and more differentiation will also

need to be possible. • Free switching from a research career to a career in education should not be possible. May be preferable from

an individual perspective, but not from a team perspective.

Concrete suggestions• Through open dialogue with the supervisor, pay attention to shifting emphases and priorities throughout each

person's career. In this way, differentiation is possible.• A switch should be in coordination with the team, taking into account both individual and team interests.

Performance & Talent Development (PTD) and Feedback Culture• Much more frequent and more informal, reciprocal conversation about employee expectations. Continuous

feedback instead of once a year in a PTD interview. • Incorporate important and/or significant events (having children, death of loved ones, and informal caregiving)

into the PTD interview.• Turn PTD interviews around. Instead of looking back at how you performed, focus on the future. What are your

ambitions and what do you need from us as an organization to achieve them? A shift from assessment to appreciation. • It is important to establish clear career perspectives, regular career interviews, career planning, training and

guidance/mentoring throughout someone’s career.

International Context/Mobility• International mobility is important; employees must also remain attractive at the international level.• Position/title is very important, especially to be attractive in an international context. • Consider the research career path after someone obtains tenure. Also consider other options such as switching

to a non-academic career within the university, careers outside the academy, and even demotion.

Concrete suggestions• Ensure a good connection at national and international level to maintain Tilburg University’s position. Research

remains important, but not everyone has to excel at it.• Encourage mobility in both academic and non-academic contexts to enhance interaction with the outside world.

Criteria & Transparency

"More transparency is needed about the criteria for promotion or tenure and the criteria on which you are evaluated in the different domains."

• Transparency is important. Objective criteria and indicators are required.• Describe and establish basic criteria and minimum requirements by domain, possibly by job level. Organization

and leadership must be transparent and clear about expectations. • Doesn't Recognition & Rewards make it harder to explain why certain people are promoted and others are not?• Transparency is needed on criteria for promotion and for tenure for all fields.• Danger of having to score on all five domains.• Avoid Recognition & Rewards being seen as a new control system in which you have to account for yourself.

Trust can be damaged as a result. • How can you make an objective and independent judgment on the five domains? How do you make it measurable?• For all domains, it is important to define what excellence is. This also requires more from the Heads of

Departments in terms of guidance, monitoring, and evaluation.

7

Concrete suggestions• Establish and define objective criteria and minimum requirements per domain in an animation so that

expectations for leadership and team spirit are clear and concrete. • Support Heads of Departments with guidance, monitoring, and evaluation for each of the five domains.

Horizontal vs. Vertical Development

"Not everyone has to become a professor.Career development can also happen horizontally instead of upwards."

• There is no room at the top, which prevents advancement or promotion. Is demotion also possible?• A lack of budget hampers vertical career opportunities. • Horizontal development paths should be possible.• Utilize the talents of young employees more.• The idea that the only academic path leads to full professorship must change. • Also consider differentiated job profiles making it is also possible to be promoted in smaller steps.

Concrete suggestions• Commit to broad development and create horizontal career paths in addition to vertical ones (e.g., in the area

of educational innovation or additional management tasks).

Broader Recognition and Rewards

"We need to find creative ways to express recognition and appreciation."

"It is time for a new system in which the focus is not only on research."

• There is great uncertainty among young employees about the course of their careers. Temporary contracts are one of the causes of this uncertainty.

• Decouple promotion and salary scale. Not everyone can become a full professor. A salary increase can be given without promotion to associate or full professor.

• Think of creative ways to express recognize and reward, including non-financial ones, for example:o “Best lecturer,” “Best employee of the month”;o Give employees more (more complex and challenging) tasks;o Free time/sabbatical; o Internship in a different (managerial) environment and then return. This provides a good connection to the

outside world, and the employee gains leadership experience;o Bonuses;o An in-house lab or facilities;o The opportunity to develop your own courses;o A grant to pay for materials or assistance.

• In addition, appreciation with a higher salary or academic title remains important.• Selection or promotion decisions should take into account what is good for the group in addition to

performance at the individual level. • In the evaluation or selection process, we should not only focus on quantity, output, and success but rather on

a person's vision, quality, and innovative ideas and risks. Only focusing on quantity is bad for the academy. • Good practice within a department: For the last two years, applicants have been asked to send in their two to

three most important papers, which are discussed during the interview. In this way, you focus on quality rather than quantity.

• Coaching/seminars focused on leadership;• Less focus on publications, more focus on competencies;• Less emphasis on excellence;• Make sure all tasks and activities are valued, even the less visible ones.

8

• More appreciation for roles in participation bodies• More recognition for "invisible" tasks such as editorial roles, peer reviewing, and organizing colloquia.

Concrete suggestions• Introduce new creative ways of recognizing and rewarding rather than just promotion or salary increase. • In evaluation or selection procedures, focus not only on counting publications but also on social impact,

innovation, and a person's vision.

Culture Change

"The invisible things are so important: the contributions to the team or the things you volunteer to take on. This is the cement of the organization. It's good that you get the appreciation for that too."

"It's good that you don't have to excel in every domain anymore."

• Training for Heads of Departments/management: their role is essential in the implementation and execution of Recognition & Rewards.

• The continuous dialogue is important for culture change.• Good recruitment (focus on the team) for the culture change regarding recognition and reward is critical to the

transition.• There is a discrepancy between Tilburg University's news reports on ranking and the new perspective of

Recognition & Rewards. Importance of ranking varies by School.

Concrete suggestions• Encourage continuous dialogue about Recognition & Rewards' philosophy.• Proper recruitment and selection procedures in view of the team.• Training on conducting open dialogue for Heads of Departments and management. Their role is essential in the

implementation and execution of this culture change.

Connection between Domains

• Link between education, research, and impact is important. The domains are closely linked.• Education should focus (more) on problems from society: problem-based learning. This is a form of and link to

impact and could also come back in the Performance & Talent Development (PTD) interviews: to what extent lecturers involve the domain Impact in their lecturing.

• What is the weighting of the different domains? And do all the domains contribute to a further career within the university?

• Research and education are complementary. So staff should be active in both activities to ensure high quality of both.

9

Timeline Recognition

& Rewards

August 2020 Room for Everyone’s Talent: The Tilburg

University Ambition

November 2019 National Position paper

‘Room for Everyone’s Talent’

October 2020 Animation

January 2021 In the Words of

Academics

January 2021 National Recognition & Rewards Festival

January-April 2021 Dialogue sessions

in the Schools

February-July 2021 Working groups per domain of

Recognition & Rewards

March 2021 Univers interview

(dutch only)

March 2021 Article Klaas Sijtsma

(dutch only)

January 2021 Article Implementation

Strategy

July 2021 Speech 2027

July 2021 Recommendations Steering Committee

July 2021 Overarching vision on Talent Development

November 2020 Attention for

Recognition & Rewards during Dies Natalis

April 2021 Implementation

Performance and Talent Development System

2022 and onwards Implementation

May-June 2021 Deliberation table recognizing, and

rewarding one another

10