17.1. Academic Promotions Policy

(Updated: December 2008)

17.1.1. Overview

This policy outlines promotion criteria for academic levels B - E.

Promotion of academic staff is designed to recognise and reward high performing staff. Potential promotion prospects should form part of the normal annual Performance Development Framework (PDF) discussions between supervisors and academic staff. Judgements relating to academic promotion are made by panels of peers through a process designed to enable fair and consistent application of standards.

Consistent with the University's aspiration as a leading national and international institution, staff should be recruited and rewarded against a leadership profile. Leadership may be in the area of the discipline, in teaching, in broader community activity, knowledge transfer or acceptance of a leadership responsibility in the University.

Promotion decisions are determined on the basis of application by candidates. There is one promotion round each year for promotion to Level C and Level D and Level E. Promotion to Level C is effective from 1 September and to Levels D and E from 1 January following determination by a Promotions Committee. Promotion to Level B is handled on a case by case basis throughout the year. Promotion to Level B and C is determined at a faculty level.

While currently there is no quota on promotion, the University reserves the right to put a quota in place in the future. If the University sets quotas this information will be available prior to any promotion round.

17.1.2. References

• Academic Promotions Guidelines http://www.hr.unimelb.edu.au/development/career_development/academic_careerdevelopment/promotions

• Personnel, Policy and Procedures Section 15.3 Classification of Academic Staff Positions

• Application Kit http://www.hr.unimelb.edu.au/development/career_development/academic_careerdevelopment/promotions

• Personnel, Policy and Procedures Section 12.6 Performance Development framework (PDF)

• Council Minutes - March 1996 and May 2003

• Council Executive Minutes - December 1998

• Academic Board - April 2003

• Teaching and Learning Management Plan

• Research and Research Training Plan

• University Expectations of a Professor

• Guidelines for Assessment of 'Performance Against Opportunity'.

• Senior Executive, December 2008

Applicants, Heads of Department and promotions committee members should consult the Academic Promotions Guidelines which provides examples of the types of activities and requirements relating to each criterion.

17.1.3. Eligibility

Academic Staff holding a full-time or part-time position, whether continuing or fixed-term, may apply for promotion.

Every academic staff member, regardless of time fraction, should have the ability to apply for promotion.

All applicants must have participated in the University's Performance Development Framework (PDF). Consistent with Section 17.1.4, a candidate must demonstrate a rating of 'good' or better assessment of overall performance as measured in the most recent PDF.

Continuing staff must be confirmed in that position and have been employed in their current position or level at the University for at least two semesters (Faculty Promotions Panels are responsible for determining all confirmation decisions and a Faculty Promotion Panel can sequentially consider a confirmation recommendation and an application for promotion to Level C. For Level D, the Faculty Panel must have determined confirmation before the applicant can apply for promotion through the Academic Promotion Panels)¹

Fixed term staff must be confirmed in that position and would normally have been employed in their current position or level at the University for three years.

Level E

Applicants must hold the rank of Level D and are expected to meet the criteria on the basis of their performance essentially since they were promoted or appointed to their present position. However, the total record of the individual is considered when determining promotion and that the achievement of the staff member reflects the significance of the rank.

17.1.4. General Principles and Definitions

17.1.4.1. Principles

• Promotion of academic staff is designed to recognise and reward sustained high achievement.

• The University aims to ensure equity, transparency and fairness in all aspects of the promotions process.

• Judgements are informed by the staff member's performance as rated in the Performance Development Framework Process.

• Judgements are based on evidence of the quality, productivity, capacity development and impact of achievement.

• Judgements are made by committees of peers through a process designed to enable fair and consistent application of standards.

• Promotion processes recognise the diversity of academic activities.

• Subject to eligibility requirements, any academic staff member may apply for promotion.

• Judgements are based on a whole of career approach.

17.1.4.2. Definitions

Capacity Development: Direct contribution to building a skill-base, knowledge framework, consortium, group, team, program of effort, collaborative network (internal or external to the University). Effectively, demonstrate an enduring contribution and impact to the University, community and/or the profession.

Committee of Peers: Committees of peers are promotions committees constituted at faculty or at University level whose membership consists of senior academic staff, experienced in a broad range of work and trained in the promotions processes.

Equity: The University aims to ensure equity, transparency and fairness in all aspects of the promotions process. All applications will be assessed on merit, and in accordance with the principles underpinning the University's equal opportunity policy. In ensuring equality of opportunity for all staff, special consideration will be given to staff whose ability to meet criteria has been limited to some extent by circumstances such as family responsibilities, disability or chronic medical condition, time fraction, and other circumstances outlined in the application form.

Knowledge Brokerage: Involvement in broader knowledge transfer activities extending beyond the academic's own research or teaching activities, relating to the field more generally. Activities may include involvement in broad community engagement, advocacy roles and public discourse.

Knowledge Transfer: The use or development of intellectual capital through a two-way beneficial interaction between the University and non-academic sectors, with direct links to teaching and research, and informed by social and global issues.

Role of PDF: The candidate will be required to have participated in the University's Performance Development Framework (PDF). A candidate must demonstrate a rating of 'good' or better assessment of overall performance as measured in the most recent PDF. The work that the candidate is required to undertake will be documented as part of the PDF discussions, and it is against these requirements that applications for promotion will be considered.

Scholarship: Scholarship informs teaching, research and knowledge transfer. Scholarship is the body of principles and practices used by scholars to make their claims about the world as valid and trustworthy as possible, and to make them known to the community. In its broadest sense, scholarship can be taken to include the paradigms and methodologies of the discipline.

Sustained Level of Achievement: Demonstrated achievement at a high level that is maintained and extended over a period of time. The level of achievement will be commensurate with the expectations of performance at the level to which promotion is sought.

Whole of Career Approach: A holistic approach to promotion based on overall academic performance and breadth of the totality of the candidate's work. The promotions committee will make an overall judgement of the candidate's standard of work in relation to the requisite standard for promotion, taking into account the work that the staff member has been required to undertake by the University.

17.1.5. Expectations of performance

The Minimum Standards for Academic Levels (MSALS) are a general guide to the duties which may be expected of an academic staff member at each level or rank. The MSALS are found at Section 15.3.

In general, to achieve promotion, an academic staff member must demonstrate an increased contribution to:

• one or more of a) contribution to teaching and learning, b) research, c) knowledge transfer and, d) leadership and service;

• capacity development in these areas;

• greater independence in thinking and action;

• academic, institutional and public life;

• public recognition of achievement; and,

• the quality and impact of achievement in either the discipline, the University or the wider community.

17.1.6. The Four Promotion Criteria

There are four broad promotion criteria. They are:

• Contribution to Teaching and Learning (experience and achievement in teaching);

• Research (advancement of the discipline);

• Knowledge Transfer (engagement in the mutually beneficial and bi-directional exchange of knowledge with the broader community with direct links to teaching and research); and,

• Leadership and Service (in the activities of the discipline, the University or the broader community).

It is acknowledged that some achievements may feature in more than one area. Applicants should avoid duplication and should highlight particular facets or dimensions of their achievements under the relevant criteria.

17.1.7. Promotions Standards

17.1.7.1. Standards Level B - E

The staff member must

• demonstrate a rating of 'good' or better achievement as measured in the most recent PDF; and,

• document performance against the promotion criteria at a standard commensurate with performance expectations at the level of promotion, (taking into account the work that the staff member has been required to undertake by the University) and explain how activities across each criterion influence each other ². Performance in these activities must be sufficient for the staff member to be able to demonstrate that he or she has made a sustained contribution in these areas.

To recommend promotion the Dean or committee must be satisfied that:

• the applicant can demonstrate: a high level of achievement and promise (in the case of Level B); excellence (in the case of Level C); or exceptional distinction (in the case of Level D), that has been achieved and maintained in the criteria nominated in the application (that being one or a combination of contributions to teaching and learning, research, knowledge transfer or leadership and service), and

• in the case of promotion to Level D (Associate Professor), the applicant's achievements are recognised as distinguished, normally in an international arena.

To demonstrate a high level of achievement and promise/excellence/exceptional distinction, it is not sufficient to have performed satisfactorily, even over an extended period. Satisfactory performance at the current level can reasonably be expected of all staff.

17.1.7.2. Standards for promotion to Reader

This title is awarded when a staff member has demonstrated high levels of achievement in research. To recommend promotion to Associate Professor and Reader, the Committee must determine that the applicant:

• meets the requirements for promotion to Associate Professor (as detailed in Section 17.1.7.1); and

• can demonstrate a sustained and distinguished international research profile.

17.1.7.3. Standards for promotion to Professor

To recommend promotion to Professor, the applicant must demonstrate eminence as a scholar of international standing.

17.1.7.4. Role of teaching and research

As part of the Growing Esteem strategy, the University explicitly acknowledges the diversity of activity that typifies its academic staff. Whilst acknowledging diversity, the normal expectation is that outstanding teaching and research are the foundation for an academic career. Although a level of achievement in research is no longer a mandatory requirement for promotion, the norm is that a member of the academic staff whose prime focus is teaching or knowledge transfer demonstrates that their contribution is underpinned by outstanding scholarship.

17.1.7.5. Preparing a case for promotion

The University expects all academic staff to maintain a high level of performance in the context of their assigned duties which would normally cover all four criteria - contribution to teaching and learning, research, knowledge transfer and leadership and service. It is acknowledged that position requirements, PDF expectations, and the specific areas of academic achievement will vary from one academic to another. For that reason, applicants are invited to assist the promotions committee by specifying the importance they wish the committee to assign to particular areas of contribution in assessing the case for promotion.

Preparing a case for promotion involves two steps:

Step 1

Applicants should indicate to the promotions committee the extent to which they believe their activities and achievements under the criteria support their argument for promotion. Applicants should base their case on the on the work they are required to undertake as part of their academic role³.

Step 2

Applicants should choose weightings, within the parameters specified below, specifying the importance they wish to assign to particular areas of contribution in assessing the case for a high level of achievement and promise (in the case of Level B); excellence (in the case of Level C); or exceptional distinction (in the case of Level D); or eminence as a scholar of international standing (in the case of Level E). The total of the weightings should sum to 100%.

Normally, an academic staff member makes contributions across all four criteria and applications will respect the following parameters:⁴.

• a weighting will be allocated to at least three criteria;

• Teaching and Learning & Research will each be rated at least 25% and in aggregate will not exceed 80%; and

• Knowledge Transfer & Leadership and Service will, in aggregate, be a minimum of 20% and a maximum of 50%.

Any claims for Knowledge Transfer and/or Leadership and Service must demonstrate a link to teaching, research and/or scholarship.

To present an argued case, applicants must document the quality, productivity, recognition and the capacity development against the specified criteria, according to the Academic Promotions Criteria Guidelines.

Leadership is an expectation of a professor at this University. Applicants for promotion to Level E must address this as part of their argued case.

In light of the University's Expectations of a Professor, applicants are required to include specific plans for their continued contributions for at least the next 3 years.

17.1.8. Performance against opportunity

The University of Melbourne is committed to creating and maintaining an inclusive working community and supporting a diverse staff profile. In this context it is committed to ensuring that all aspects of the promotions process are fair, transparent and inclusive. Applications for promotion will be assessed on merit and in accordance with the University's equal opportunity policy.

The working arrangements of University staff are many and varied in nature. At various times in their careers many staff will experience planned or unplanned career breaks or work flexibility in order to accommodate a range of personal and professional demands. The performance of a diverse staff community is assessed within a conceptual framework that acknowledges the relative opportunities that staff may experience at different stages in their working lives, an approach that is known as 'assessing performance against (or relative to) opportunity.'

In recognition of this fact, staff are strongly encouraged to outline circumstances relevant to the particular case they are making for promotion in their applications and referee reports. Family responsibilities, carer duties, disability, fractional appointments, career interruptions, and specifically defined circumstances relating to 'chronic medical condition' and 'misadventure' are all examples of circumstances that staff at the University may experience during their working life. It is recommended that applications make explicit the applicant's particular circumstances, and outline the impact that these circumstances have had on the applicant's career trajectory and performance in any of the four areas of academic activity if they wish these to be considered by the committee. The contributions and performance of staff can be more accurately assessed where the nature and impact of these circumstances is made explicit in application. It is appropriate for staff to draw attention to the relationship between these circumstances and their career progression and performance.

Like all staff, staff holding fractional appointments are to be assessed on the basis of the quality and level of their performance and relative to the opportunities available to them. Promotions committees are encouraged to consider whether, overall and on balance, applicants holding fractional appointments demonstrate an appropriate level of contribution consistent with the fraction of their appointment, and of the requisite quality. This aims to reduce the likelihood of staff being inadvertently assessed against the notional norm of an uninterrupted full-time fraction where it des not apply.

17.2. Promotion Committee Procedures

^{(Updated: December 2008)}

17.2.1. Introduction

An Academic Promotions Officer will be appointed by Council to administer the promotions procedures on behalf of Council, under the proposals set out below. On significant issues, he or she will consult with the President of the Academic Board and, in some cases, all three elected Board Officers.

The Academic Promotions Officer will not be a member of any Promotions Panel or hear any Appeal. At his or her absolute discretion he or she may be an observer at any meeting of any Promotions Panel or Appeal hearing, but may not participate in any decision of such Panel or hearing.

The Provost may report to Council through the Vice-Chancellor.

The Academic Promotions Officer and the President of the Academic Board will identify and secure the agreement of people to sit on the Academic Promotions Panels and Senior Appointments and Promotions Committee as described below.

Note: This policy applies to promotion committee procedures for Levels C-D-E. Promotion to Level B is handled at a faculty level on a case by case basis. Application procedures for Levels B-E are detailed in Section 17.3.

17.2.2. Panels

Level C

For promotion to Level C, individual Faculty Promotions Panels will be established.

The composition of each Faculty Promotions Panel shall be as follows ;

• A chairperson - who shall be the Dean of the Faculty.

• At least four other members (one or two of whom will be external to the Faculty).

Deans are responsible for establishing the timetable and meeting dates for their panel within the timetable set by Human Resources.

Level D

For promotion to Level D, four Academic Promotions Panels will be established and grouped on a Faculty basis as follows ;

• Architecture, Building and Planning; Engineering; Science.

• Arts; Education; VCA; Music.

• Land and Food Resources; Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences; Veterinary Science.

• Economics and Commerce; Law (staff members from the Melbourne Business School will participate as panel members within this Faculty group).

The composition of each Academic Promotions Panel shall be as follows:

• A Chairperson (who will not be a staff member of any of the faculties in the grouping).

• The Dean of each Faculty in the group (any reference to 'Dean' hereinafter also applies to the Director of the Melbourne Business School), or the Dean's nominee.

• Two members from outside the member faculties.

• Two members of the Academic Staff from each participating Faculty who, except in exceptional circumstances, will be of the rank of Level D or above.

Procedures for single department faculties are detailed in Section 17.3.3.

Level E

There will be a Professorial Promotions Panel (PPP) established for each Faculty. Members must be Professors or hold equivalent rank.

Each Panel will normally comprise a minimum of five Professors and membership is not limited to Professors of the University of Melbourne.

Membership will consist:

• Dean (or nominee) - Chair;

• 2 external members - at least one of whom must be from another Faculty within the University;

• 2 members internal to the Faculty or Department;

• Up to 3 other co-opted members (e.g. with discipline expertise, an appropriate member of Council, hospital nominees for professor/director positions or where the position has industry links) may be nominated.

Members nominated to serve on Committees are those best placed to make informed appointment (and promotion) decisions for the Faculty and the University.

PPPs must approach gender balance.

The Dean will recommend the proposed membership of their Panel to the President of the Academic Board who must decide whether to approve the proposed membership. If the President does not approve the proposed membership, the matter will be referred to the Provost for final determination.

The Dean will chair the PPP. If the Dean is unable to Chair the Panel for the whole process, he or she must consult, in advance of commencement of any meetings, with the Provost. The Provost will nominate an alternative Chair, who will normally be the Deputy Dean or an Associate Dean.

Deans are responsible for establishing the timetable and meeting dates for their panel within the timetable set by Human Resources.

Senior Appointments and Promotions Committee

The membership of the SAPC will be:

• Provost, or another DVC as nominee

• A Deputy Vice-Chancellor

• President of the Academic Board

• Vice-President of the Academic Board

• Four other persons nominated by the Provost and the President of the Academic Board

Each Dean of Faculty will be present for consideration of the cases from their Faculty.

17.2.3. General Principles

• The membership of the Faculty Promotions Panel and the Academic Promotions Panels is approved by the Provost and the President of the Academic Board.

• In an emergency, the Provost and the President of the Board may appoint an Acting Chair.

• Panel membership is not limited to staff of the University of Melbourne.

• Members will normally be at the rank of Level D or E, unless otherwise approved by the Provost and the President of the Board. Members of Level E panels must be at Level E.

• Panels are expected to approach gender balance.

• The quorum for each Faculty Promotions Panel is four.

• The quorum for each Academic Promotions Panel is six.

• The quorum for each Professorial Promotions Panel is four members, with at least two of those members present from either those external to the Faculty or from the co-opted members.

• The quorum for the SAPC is three members.

• Each Panel will be serviced by an officer from Human Resources.

• No person may apply for promotion during a year in which he or she has agreed to be included in the membership of an Academic Promotions Panel or a Faculty Promotions Panel.

• If a member has no previous experience serving on a Promotions Panel, they must participate in a formal briefing session.

17.2.4. Observers

Any promotions Panel may have an EO observer nominated by the Manager, Equity and Diversity, in attendance.

In addition, a staff member undergoing consideration for promotion up to Level D may request that the academic staff member on Council or his or her nominee participate as an observer on a promotion panel.

Observers must act impartially to ensure procedural fairness applies to the promotion process and must not represent the interests of either the University or the staff member undergoing consideration for promotion. (Observers are normally from outside the Faculty).

Observers are bound by the same rules of confidentiality as members and have access to papers in advance. They have speaking rights only on matters of procedure or perceived discrimination. They do not have voting rights. An observer must not be a current applicant for promotion and must not be a member of a Faculty to which the Panel is relevant. However, in exceptional circumstances, the Provost may approve, in advance, an observer who is a member from within the Faculty who holds an academic rank at least equivalent to the level being considered for promotion.

17.2.5. Conflict of Interest

A committee member must declare to the chairperson any actual or potential conflict of interest which may arise as a result of involvement in the promotions process. If a committee member is uncertain whether an actual or potential conflict of interest exists, advice should be sought from the chairperson prior to the meeting.

The chairperson is responsible for ensuring that no declared conflict of interest can influence the outcome of the application and that there can be no reasonable perception that it might have done. If necessary, the chairperson will require the committee member to withdraw from the committee.

17.2.6. Decisions, Approvals and Quality Assurance

The decision to promote to Level C will be determined by each Faculty Promotions Panel.

Recommendations for promotions to Level D will be made to the Provost and the President of the Academic Board, who will determine them.

SAPC makes the decision on promotion to professor and will report quarterly through the Provost to Council.

Applications are considered on their merits in relation to the criteria for promotion, taking into account the weighting selected by the applicants for the case for promotion. An applicant chooses weightings, within the specified parameters, to guide the promotions committee in their assessment of the application.

The committee will consider these weightings and determine if the applicant has made a case for:

• a high level of achievement and promise (in the case of Level B);

• excellence (in the case of Level C);

• exceptional distinction (in the case of Level D); or

• demonstrate eminence as a scholar of international standing (in the case of Level E).

Consistent with a 'whole of career' approach to promotion, the committee has the discretion to adjust these weightings if it is of benefit to the applicant.

At the completion of the round, the Chair of each Panel (C and D) will provide a report to the Provost and President of the Academic Board. This will include information on successful and unsuccessful decisions and recommendations and will be used to monitor overall consistency of decision making.

The Senior Appointments and Promotions Committee will conduct a formal review session with the Chairs of all Panels following completion of each round.

17.3. Application Procedures

17.3.1. Timetable

A Timetable is set by the Human Resources Division each year. It is designed to ensure fair treatment and ensure that there is no miscarriage of process due to unrealistic time frames being placed on applicants. The timetable is available at : http://www.hr.unimelb.edu.au/development/career_development/academic_careerdevelopment/promotions/.

17.3.2. Preparation of Application

Applicants must formally advise the Head of Department of their intention to apply for promotion. The Head must advise the staff member of the names of the senior colleagues ⁵ to be consulted and the applicant must have the opportunity to comment on their selection. The applicant may nominate up to two additional senior colleagues to be added to those nominated by the Head. They must provide a reason why those colleagues are to be included and ensure that they are available to participate in the process.

In addition, for promotion to Level D or E, applicants must provide the names. addresses, fax numbers and email addresses of three referees, along with a brief comment of why chosen.

17.3.3. Recommendation by Head of Department

The applicant must submit the application through the Head of Department for report and recommendation. The report and recommendation shall be made after consultation with senior members of staff in the Department, and should include:

• Details of why the colleagues were consulted ;

• The views of senior staff, listing them by name and title (rank). If the senior staff agree totally with the report and recommendation from the Head, then they should sign the report. If senior staff have any comments they consider have not been included in the Head's report, they may include an additional report which must be presented to the Head of Department and shown to the staff member ;

• Comments on the extent to which he or she considers the staff member to have demonstrated the competence, achievement and/or distinction claimed ;

• The basis for that judgement ;

• Whether the staff member has demonstrated an on-going capacity for development ;

• Comments on the extent to which he or she considers the staff member is competent in the four broad areas of Teaching and Learning, Research, Knowledge Transfer and Leadership and Service, and the extent to which a high level of achievement, excellence or distinction has been achieved and maintained in the criteria nominated by the applicant ⁶;

• A clear and precise recommendation on the merits of the promotion application according to the criteria for promotion.

Senior colleagues must also provide a clear and precise recommendation on the merits of the promotion application according to the nominated criteria for the promotion.

The report and recommendation by the Head and any reports by senior members of the department must be shown to the candidate, who will have the opportunity to comment on the report/s before the application and report are submitted to Human Resources.

The staff member and the Head may agree that the application lapse or be deferred. If the application is not proceeding, no information is required to be submitted to Human Resources.

In the case of an application for promotion to Level D (either Associate Professor or Associate Professor and Reader), the Head of Department and the applicant will each furnish the names of three suitable referees. For Level E, the applicant will nominate three suitable nominees.

Recommendations by the Head are in the form of advice to assist the Panels in their deliberations. This will be the last opportunity for the department to provide substantial information and advice about the candidate. During proceedings of the Panels, Heads and Deans (or their nominees) must not introduce additional grounds that have not been tested with the candidate, although they may clarify matters already raised.

Notes:

1. In one-department faculties the Dean will determine what role he/she will take in respect to cases from his/her faculty. The Dean will:

   • Allocate another senior colleague in the Faculty to prepare the Head of Department report and the Dean will not provide any contribution to the report; or

   • Participate in the production of the report and nominate another senior colleague to be the Dean's nominee on the relevant Panel for the whole round.

2. Where a member of staff holds concurrent appointments in different departments, the recommendation to promote should come from the Head of the Department where the substantive position is held. The Head may, at the request of the candidate, consult with the Head of the other Department.

3. When a Head of Department is a candidate for promotion, the Dean may:

   • nominate another senior person who will take on the role as Dean's nominee and will consult with senior colleagues, prepare the report and recommend on promotion to the Academic Promotions Panel; or

   • elect to stand down from the decision making at the Promotions Panel level and will consult with senior colleagues, prepare the report and recommend on promotion to the Academic Promotions Panel.

4. In the case where the applicant for promotion is the Dean the Provost will nominate another senior position who will take on the role as Dean.

17.3.4. Submission of Application

For promotion to all levels, the applicant must submit the application to the Head of Department for report and recommendation. The Head of Department sends the application and reports to the applicant, who may comment, and, for promotion to Level B, forward to the Dean, and for promotion to Level C and D, forward to the Human Resources Division. For promotion to Level D, Human Resources will, after checking, forward applications to the Dean. Where the report from the Head of Department does not recommend promotion an applicant may still choose to submit the application for consideration by the appropriate panel.

For Level D, the Dean will consider the referees nominated by the applicant and the Head. The Dean may not change the referees nominated by the applicant. If the Dean considers that the selection of referees is not adequate, the Dean may consult with the Head, and may either replace those nominated by the Head, or add additional referees. The Human Resources Division will advise the applicant of the change, or of the addition of referees. The applicant may comment on these changes but this will not preclude the reports being obtained.

If the PPP consider there is a prima facie case for promotion to Level E, the PPP will review the referees nominated by the applicant. In exceptional circumstances the PPP may consult the applicant about the referees nominated. The PPP will nominate a minimum of three referees. The Human Resources Division will advise the applicant of the additional referees. The applicant may comment on the choice but this will not preclude the reports being obtained.

Human Resources will co-ordinate referee reports. Referees are asked to report on all grounds for promotion. However, Deans must advise Human Resources whether there is any specific advice that the referee should provide, in addition to the general information.

17.3.5. Determination of promotion by level

17.3.5.1. Level A to B

Determination of promotion from Level A to B is by the Dean, after consideration of the recommendations of the Head of Department (in the case of a multi-department faculty) or the Dean's nominee (in the case of a one department faculty) and senior colleagues.

17.3.5.2. Level B to C

Determination of promotion from Level B to C is by Faculty Promotions Panels.

The relevant Faculty Promotions Panel will review all applications. The decision of the Panel is final.

17.3.5.3. Level C to D

Determination of promotion from Level C to D is by Academic Promotions Panels

If the application is for promotion to Level D (Associate Professor only) the Head of Department, after consultation with appropriate senior colleagues in the Faculty and beyond the Faculty and the University if deemed necessary, will recommend in favour of promotion to Level D (Associate Professor only).

If the application includes an application for promotion to Reader, the Head of Department will consult appropriately, giving additional consideration to this aspect of the application, and recommend in favour of promotion to Level D (Associate Professor and Reader).

If the applicant applies for promotion to Associate Professor and Reader, and the Head of Department recommends in favour of Associate Professor only, the merits of the application for Reader will not be reviewed by the Promotions Panel unless there is a request from the applicant to do so.

The Academic Promotions Panel will determine whether the applicant should be promoted to Associate Professor or Associate Professor and Reader.

The Panel may, in exceptional circumstances, consider that additional information is required before a decision can be made. The additional information might need to be obtained from the applicant, the Head, additional referee(s) or other as determined by the Panel. If this is the case, the application will be held over for consideration at a later, emergency meeting of the Panel. The applicant will be advised if any additional information is required.

17.3.5.4. Level D to E

Each PPP considers all applications from their faculty and determines if there is a prima facie case before proceeding to referees.

The Panel may obtain any additional information it requires to enable full and detailed consideration of each application.

The Panel provides to the SAPC the applications of those to be recommended for promotion and a list of applicants who are not being recommended.

The SAPC receives the recommended applications and the list of applicants not being recommended from each PPP.

The Dean will write a report for each candidate and present each case to the SAPC. Deans will remain for the discussion of their cases but will not be present for the final decision. The Committee may obtain any additional information it requires to enable full and detailed consideration of each application.

The Committee advises individual Deans on the final determinations made on promotion to professor for their faculty applications.

17.3.6. Counselling and Feedback for Unsuccessful Candidates

Normally, feedback and counselling will be provided by the Chairperson of the panel to the unsuccessful applicant and to the staff member's Head of Department. Such counselling would normally include advice on:

• any level of achievement or distinction which has not been met by the candidate;

• the weightings nominated across the promotions criteria by the applicant;

• advice on professional development which would help to overcome deficiencies;

• advice on future promotion applications.

Counselling is to provide feedback to unsuccessful candidates and may not be included as grounds for appeal.

For Level E:

If the application does not proceed beyond the PPP stage, the Panel will nominate a member to provide feedback and counselling.

If the SAPC determines not to promote, a member of the Committee and/or the Dean will be nominated to provide feedback and counselling.

17.3.7. Appeals

Appeals will only be considered on the grounds of procedural irregularity or miscarriage of process (except appeals for promotion to Level B, which will be considered on the merits of the case).

The Vice-Principal (Human Resources) will nominate the member or members of the Appeal Panel (normally two members).

The Appeal Panel may:

• determine that there was no procedural irregularity or miscarriage of process and dismiss the appeal;

• determine that there was a procedural irregularity or miscarriage of process, but that this was not such as to materially affect the outcome of the Promotions Panel's deliberations and dismiss the appeal; or

• determine that there was a procedural irregularity or miscarriage of process of such kind or degree that, if the irregularity or miscarriage had not occurred, the outcome of the Promotions Panel's deliberations may have been favourable to the applicant and advise the Provost that the appeal is upheld. In these circumstances, the application for promotion will be reconsidered, on the merits of the application, by a differently constituted Academic Promotions Panel or Faculty Promotions Panel formed by the Provost and the President of the Academic Board.

Save in exceptional circumstances, notification of an appeal and the grounds on which it is to be made must be lodged with the Vice-Principal (Human Resources) within 14 days of notification to the staff member of the decision not to promote.

17.4. Linked Advancement Program: Professional Staff

^{(Updated: July 2006)}

17.4.1. Overview

The Linked Advancement Program (LAP) provides professional staff with the opportunity to progress through the professional staff classification structure on the basis of work availability, development and individual performance. The LAP links two classification levels together to form an extended pay structure.

The LAP seeks to provide supervisors with the flexibility to reward and recognise performance at the Department or Faculty level. As progression via the LAP is based, inter alia, on individual performance in a position, when the position is vacated, it may be filled at the lower classification level.

17.4.2. References

• University of Melbourne Professional Staff Performance Development Framework http://www.hr.unimelb.edu.au/development/pdf

• The University of Melbourne Enterprise Agreement 2006

17.4.3. Policy

17.4.3.1. Advancement Through the Linked Grades

Promotion through the linked classification levels means that, subject to the criteria in Section 17-7.1.3.2 :

• staff members appointed to Level 1 may have access to Level 2;

• staff members appointed to Level 2 may have access to Level 3;

• staff members appointed to Level 3 may have access to Level 4;

• staff members appointed to Level 4 may have access to Level 5;

• staff members appointed to Level 5 may have access to Level 6;

• staff members appointed to Level 6 may have access to Level 7;

• staff members appointed to Level 7 may have access to Level 8; and

• staff members appointed to Level 8 may have access to Level 9.

17.4.3.2. Criteria for Advancement

The criteria for promotion are:

(1) work at the higher level in the Department must be available and needed;

(2) the staff member has achieved a rating of at least 'good' as part of their last performance feedback discussion; and

(3) the staff member meets the training level or qualifications requirements in the position classification standards for the higher level (i.e. the staff member has the necessary skill base).

17.4.3.3. Timing of Advancement

Advancement to the higher classification level would normally be considered when the staff member reaches the top increment of the lower level. It is not automatic. It should be seen as part of the development and reward process for general staff, and a means of ensuring flexibility of staffing in Departments.

A general staff member may be advanced to the next classification level only once through LAP. Advancement in the same position following a linked advancement must be through the reclassification process (see Section 15.2.3.3 Review/Reclassification of a Position).

17.4.4. Procedures

17.4.4.1. Planning

It is the joint responsibility of the supervisor and professional staff member to plan for the move to the higher level. This should form part of the normal Performance Development Framework discussions and should include:

• consideration of what work at the higher level involves;

• consideration of the needs of the Department for work at the higher level;

• training requirements including possible secondment;

• planning as to how the job will 'grow' to allow the general staff member to work at the higher level;

• opportunities to relieve in positions at the higher level;

• progressively building upon aspects of their existing job in the last year at the lower classification level; and

• if the supervisor and the staff member do not believe the job will grow, consideration of appropriate transfer opportunities for the genaral staff member.

17.4.4.2. Approval Process

Linked advancement should be discussed between supervisors and staff as part of normal Performance Development Framework discussions. Should a staff member and their supervisor agree that linked advancement may be appropriate and that the criteria for advancement (see Section 17.4.3.2 above) have been met, the supervisor should consult the Head of Department.

Should the Head of Department support the proposal for linked advancement, he or she should make a recommendation to the Head of Budget Division who may determine the application. Approved applications should be forwarded to the Division of Human Resources for necessary action.

17.4.4.3. Application Process

Applications for linked advancement should be made on the appropriate form which can be downloaded at http://www.hr.unimelb.edu.au/benefits/forms/.

17.5. Performance Bonus Scheme

(Last updated: November 2007)

17.5.1. Overview

The University seeks to recognise exceptional and outstanding performance. Rewards may include public recognition and opportunities for further career advancement.

Professional Staff may be eligible to be considered for a discretionary performance bonus in the following instances:

• Where a professional staff member is assessed as outstanding in his or her performance review; or,

• On the achievement of a set of pre-determined targets as negotiated in the performance development framework and which have been linked to a one-off payment.

The payment of a performance bonus is subject to the availability of funds.

17.5.1.1. Conditions of Payment

Bonuses are superannuable and are paid as a single annual payment. A maximum of one such payment per annum is permitted.

Bonuses may only be awarded on the achievement of an 'outstanding' rating in the Performance Development Framework, or on the achievement of pre-determined targets.

Targets are not considered to be the normal activities that form part of a staff member's role, they are stretch targets. They must be set in advance of the bonus period and agreed to between the manager, staff member and Head of Budget Division.

17.5.2. Procedures

17.5.2.1. Approval Process

Recommendations are made by the direct supervisor and must include a detailed argument on how the staff member meets the criteria. Where roles are autonomous, consultation with clients, colleagues, etc. may need to occur before the recommendation is made. The supervisor should discuss the proposal with the Head of Department prior to making a formal recommendation.

Should the Head of Department support the proposed performance bonus, he or she should indicate as such on the recommendation and forward it to the Head of Budget Division who may determine the application. Approved recommendations should be forwarded to the Division of Human Resources for necessary action.

In considering recommendations for a performance bonus, the Head of Budget Division will take into account the existing distribution of bonuses within the Faculty or Division; the availability of funds; the reasons for the bonus; and where relevant, the broader impact across the Division.

Note: In the case of a pre-negotiated performance bonus (linked to the achievement of certain targets and detailed in the performance development framework), the approval of such an arrangement should occur by the Head of Budget Division in advance of the bonus period (ie. at the negotiation stage).

17.5.2.2. Application Process

Recommendations for the payment of a performance bonus should be made on the appropriate form which can be downloaded at http://www.hr.unimelb.edu.au/benefits/forms/.

In the case of pre-negotiated target payments, the approval by the Head of Budget Division at the commencement of the period should be attached to the form.

17.5.2.3. Reporting

Faculties will report to the Remuneration and Employment Conditions Committee (RECC) on an annual basis the details of professional staff in receipt of performance bonus payments. Reports shall include details of the bonus as a percentage of total salary.

Created: September 1995
Last Modified: 12 October 2009
Authorised by: Web & Administrative Officer, Human Resources.