An exploration of the investors in people standard in the university sector
An exploration of the investors in people standard in the university sector
This study explores the uptake of the Investors in People Standard, the UK's national standard for good staff development practice, in the Higher Education sector. It examines the reasons why there has been such a slow rate of achievement of the Standard in this sector, the differences between pre and post 1992 Universities and the potential benefits to those who do achieve it. This exploration is located within an analysis of the changing landscape and culture of HE, the relatively few research studies that have been conducted on the Standard, and the staff development literature in higher education. The Standard lies at the heart of Government plans to increase the skills and productivity of the UK's workforce and a decade after its launch over 60% of large employers have achieved the Standard. Yet, despite support from HE stakeholders like HEFCE, QAA, HESDA and Universities UK, and a strong recommendations that the Standard be adopted to improve poor staff development practices in HE, only 13 universities have achieved the Standard, one pre-1992 university and 12 post-1992 universities.
The reasons for this are explored through a three stage research design - a narrative based on the experience of one post-1992 university working towards the Standard, statistical analysis of uptake and achievement of the Standard and an in-depth analysis of semi-structured interviews of a range of academic, support and consultant staff.
Three significant findings were as follows. Firstly, Universities perceived academically-orientated benchmarks, like the RAE and subject review, to be more important than staff development benchmarks like the Standard and consequently gave them higher priority. Secondly, the Standard, linked as it is to the growing trend of managerialism in the sector, was seen to be in conflict with a 'traditional' academic culture. Thirdly, post-1992 universities and service departments in pre-1992 universities, were perceived to have a more corporate culture that made it easier for them to commit to and achieve the Standard.
University of Southampton
Read, Ann Musgrove
99e25281-1625-47b6-9d75-8bfb72dde2f1
2002
Read, Ann Musgrove
99e25281-1625-47b6-9d75-8bfb72dde2f1
Read, Ann Musgrove
(2002)
An exploration of the investors in people standard in the university sector.
University of Southampton, Doctoral Thesis.
Record type:
Thesis
(Doctoral)
Abstract
This study explores the uptake of the Investors in People Standard, the UK's national standard for good staff development practice, in the Higher Education sector. It examines the reasons why there has been such a slow rate of achievement of the Standard in this sector, the differences between pre and post 1992 Universities and the potential benefits to those who do achieve it. This exploration is located within an analysis of the changing landscape and culture of HE, the relatively few research studies that have been conducted on the Standard, and the staff development literature in higher education. The Standard lies at the heart of Government plans to increase the skills and productivity of the UK's workforce and a decade after its launch over 60% of large employers have achieved the Standard. Yet, despite support from HE stakeholders like HEFCE, QAA, HESDA and Universities UK, and a strong recommendations that the Standard be adopted to improve poor staff development practices in HE, only 13 universities have achieved the Standard, one pre-1992 university and 12 post-1992 universities.
The reasons for this are explored through a three stage research design - a narrative based on the experience of one post-1992 university working towards the Standard, statistical analysis of uptake and achievement of the Standard and an in-depth analysis of semi-structured interviews of a range of academic, support and consultant staff.
Three significant findings were as follows. Firstly, Universities perceived academically-orientated benchmarks, like the RAE and subject review, to be more important than staff development benchmarks like the Standard and consequently gave them higher priority. Secondly, the Standard, linked as it is to the growing trend of managerialism in the sector, was seen to be in conflict with a 'traditional' academic culture. Thirdly, post-1992 universities and service departments in pre-1992 universities, were perceived to have a more corporate culture that made it easier for them to commit to and achieve the Standard.
Text
841014.pdf
- Version of Record
More information
Published date: 2002
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 464653
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/464653
PURE UUID: 8fd7165a-2bda-4b24-aea4-5823bdc04039
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 04 Jul 2022 23:54
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 19:40
Export record
Contributors
Author:
Ann Musgrove Read
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics