Institutional Statement

The Head of Institution is required to provide a statement explaining whether or not they support an individual’s application and the reasons for their decision. This statement should: 

  • represent the view of the Institution and should comment on the strength of the case for promotion in terms of the respective Assessment Criteria;
  • include evidence of excellence with respect to these criteria, and the quality of the applicant’s contribution across the criteria since their last promotion/appointment;
  • refer to both generic and local Indicators of Excellence, where relevant; 
  • comment on the applicant’s overall role and contribution to the academic enterprise and their standing in relation to other academic/research employees in the Institution and provide contextual information on the applicant’s achievement over and above what would normally be expected of someone in their current role; 
  • provide a comparison of the applicant’s teaching hours to the institution’s average where possible;
  • include comments on the quality of the applicant’s teaching from the Institution’s academic lead for teaching if appropriate; and
  • refer to any student feedback included in the application, where applicable.

The Head of Institution may delegate the preparation of the statement to the relevant line manager, who should be consulted to ensure they are able to prepare the statement. Where this is done, the Head of Institution should confirm that the statement represents the view of the Institution on the case for promotion. The statement must be submitted by the requested date and in time for the Promotion Panel meeting. 

Statements should be no more than two sides of A4.  The Chair of the Promotion Panel will return any statements that do not provide sufficient detail or do not conform to this guidance with a request that the statement is amplified and returned by the date on which the agenda and documentation are circulated to members of the Promotion Panel. 

The statement forms part of an individual’s application documentation and, as part of the feedback process, will be disclosed to the applicant on request. 

Funding

In all cases, the statement must include details of the funding, including the source from which the case for promotion is to be met. Queries concerning funding for applications on the T&S pathway should be raised with the relevant School Finance Business Partner in the first instance.  Queries concerning funding for applications on the R pathway should be raised with the relevant Principal Investigator (PI).

As per Special Ordinance C (ii), appointments to established University offices are to the retiring age. Applications for promotion to these offices therefore require proof of funding to cover the appointment to the retiring age. Applications that cannot demonstrate available funding will be withdrawn.

Multidisciplinary applications

It may be necessary for the Head of Institution preparing the statement to consult with the Head(s) of other Institutions where an applicant has stated that their case for promotion is multidisciplinary, they hold a ‘joint’ office, or their duties involve a regular and substantial contribution to the teaching programme of other institutions. 

Contextual Factors

Where an applicant has provided details of Contextual Factors, these should be taken into account in the statement and when evaluating their contribution, detailing the impact this has had on their ability to carry out their duties. 

Staff Review and Development (SRD) scheme

Line managers are expected to undertake annual SRDs with employees as part of the scheme, and it is recommended that the SRD undertaken in the last 12 months is used to support an individual’s application.  Heads of Institution must indicate when the most recent SRD with an applicant took place in the statement. 

Departure from the Standard Scoring Model

In exceptional circumstances, the Head of Institution may propose a departure from the standard scoring model for the office/post for which the applicant has applied.  If appropriate, this should be detailed in the statement.  More information on this can be found here.

The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)

Institutional statements must adhere to the principles of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), of which the University is a signatory. The assessment of an application, and therefore the institutional statement, must not make any reference to “high impact”, “high quality”, “influential”, “high ranking”, “top tier” or “Q1 (1st quartile)” journals, or use any other such language that suggests a journal, publisher or other dissemination outlet is superior. Assessment must be made on the quality and impact of the research itself, and not on where it has been published, or the quantity of outputs.