The university has a “final framework” for academic workloads – including ambitious research targets

The document, released to staff Tuesday, includes consideration of staff-consultation concerns, including proposed publication and research income requirements, set out in a previous draft (CMM October 2).

But not everybody is convinced the new requirements are achievable. “It’s like moving the high jump bar from 10m to 7.5m – sounds like a lot, but it’s still not jumpable,” a learned reader suggests.

Still, everybody has an idea what they are up for: While there is debate about detail on the timing of some objectives, overall the document sets out university practise for academic probation and promotion plus education, service and research workloads. The university tells staff it builds on work starting in 2015, when “research active” was first defined.

According to the university, the promotion process is not rigid in requiring that all specified achievements are met, “you are required to make a case – there is no set number of examples. And management commits to assessing performance, “relative to opportunity,” which involves, “giving consideration to working circumstances and arrangements as well as career history.”

So, what’s the problem: Some of the hard metrics is what.

Certainly, some of the more ambitious research income targets for professors are scaled back. In the last draft, a top engineering academic had to bring in $158 000 (presumably per annum). Now it’s $120 000. In agriculture-veterinary science, where $280 000 was required now it’s $211 000.  And in history and archaeology the $83 000 for a Level E and $31 000 for a Level A are reduced to $48 000 and $14 000 respectively. But it appears to some that they will need to be meeting these targets by 2022, not long given the time ARC/NHMRC applications take and their less low than subterranean success rates.

Publishing requirements are also challenging, it appears deliberately so, “I especially appreciate the fact that we want to set our research goals high enough to reach the level of universities that are above Murdoch in the rankings,” is a staff feedback quote in the framework.

When fully in place, professors will need to publish at twice the average annual rate for their field of research and the most junior academics at half the average.

Management obviously thinks it is all doable but last night some research-active staff were not sure, wondering what life would be like in teaching-specialist roles.