1. Introduction
2. General principles
2.1 Committee membership
2.2 Attendance at committees
2.3 Impartiality
2.4 Confidentiality and data protection
3. Making decisions about promotion
3.1 An evidence-based process
3.2 Assessment against the criteria
3.3 Equal opportunities and time available for duties
4. Faculty Promotions Committee meeting overview
This document provides guidance for promotion committees. Please read in conjunction with the Promotion Procedure and other relevant supplementary guidance.
Membership of committees and the respective roles of those in attendance are detailed in Appendix 2 of the Promotion Procedure. New committee members should be briefed about their role by the Dean and Head of HR Business Partnering in advance of FPC.
The Chair is responsible for ensuring that the meeting is quorate in line with Appendix 2 of the promotion procedure and there is adequate attendance at the meeting to ensure effectiveness and appropriateness of decision-making, particularly in relation to gender representation.
Members unable to attend are not permitted to provide written input in lieu of attendance.
Committee members must ensure they can provide an impartial, fair and consistent judgement. Before discussions begin, members of the committee must declare any conflicts of interest, or any relationship with a candidate that might be perceived as creating a conflict capable of affecting their impartial judgement. The Chair will then determine the appropriate action to take on a case by case basis, up to and including requesting the committee member to physically withdraw during the discussion and voting. Where the Chair declares a conflict of interest requiring their withdrawal from the meeting, they will nominate an alternate Chair for the consideration of that case.
Members of committees do not represent their schools and there should be no advocacy of individual cases.
Committee members should ensure that all personal data is treated with an appropriate level of confidentiality and handled in accordance with the relevant data protection legislation as detailed within the staff fair processing notice. It is the responsibility of the Dean to provide outcomes and feedback to applicants in a meeting with their Head of School. Under no circumstances should a committee member discuss the activities or workings of the committee outside of the meeting.
HR will retain appropriate records of the process, and applications and committee information will be circulated digitally. If a committee member chooses to make a paper copy or their own notes, these must be kept confidential and should be securely destroyed following the process.
Promotion is a peer-review process in which decisions are based on an objective review by committee members of all the written evidence presented to them. Therefore, the burden of proof is on the candidate to demonstrate that they meet the criteria for promotion. Committees are required to make judgements about promotion exclusively on the basis of the evidence presented to them. Where this is not provided, promotion should not be agreed.
The criteria for promotion are set out in Section 3 of the Promotion Procedure.
Consideration of equality factors, in line with the University's Diversity and Inclusion policy, is critical to the effective operation of the University’s promotion procedure.
To bring an equality issue to the attention of the Committee the individual should do so by completing the relevant section of the application form. This statement should outline the relevant issue(s), make specific reference to the criteria for promotion that have been impacted and also provide evidence of this impact wherever possible.
Committees must not raise or discuss any equality factors that are not explicitly referred to by the candidate in their application form as doing so would be a breach of confidentiality and data protection.
Each case should be considered on its own merit and without precedent, as any equality issue could impact individuals differently depending on their circumstances.
Making an equality-related adjustment does not allow committees to lower the bar when assessing excellence. Instead it requires that committees recognise where a candidate has faced additional barriers in achieving specific promotion criteria and adjust accordingly, for example, by recognising there has been an impact on the quantity of activity undertaken (e.g. number of publications). In these circumstances committees would still require the candidate to demonstrate the same quality standard as other candidates in terms of the excellence of their contribution.
In making their assessments, committees should take into account the amount of time that has been available to candidates for the completion of their duties and make pro-rata adjustments for the expected quantity of outputs.
Prior to the Committee, two presenters (one primary and one secondary) will be assigned to each case. The presenters will be subject to the Dean’s approval and should not work in the same School or have conflicts of interest with the candidate.
The Chair will open the committee and then for each case the two assigned presenters will summarise the details to the panel. They will draw out the strengths and weaknesses of the case, objectively directing attention to appropriate points in the reports, and initiate general discussion without drawing conclusions.
The Chair should then facilitate a general discussion, ensuring that all committee members have appropriate input and taking care to consider any equality issues.
Decisions should be taken as detailed in Section 4 of the Promotion Procedure. Decisions are taken at FPC by an anonymous vote, at which there can be no abstentions.
Candidates will be advised of outcomes as outlined in the Promotion Procedure.
