(1) These Guidelines provide a framework for the planning and allocation of workloads for academic staff. (2) These Guidelines apply to schools, institutes and centres and other units involved in the allocation of workload for Teaching and Research, Teaching-Focused, Clinical Academic and Research-Only academic staff. (3) These Guidelines do not apply to the allocation of workload to casual academic staff. (4) The University of Queensland is committed to maintaining a framework for the planning, allocation and management of academic staff workload. As a background to this commitment, the Enterprise Agreement imposes obligations on Heads of School and Directors, as set out in the Enterprise Agreement: (5) The aim of these Guidelines is to help Heads of School and Directors to plan, allocate and manage workloads through full and reasonable consultation with all members of academic staff to provide transparency and accountability. Although certain important principles should apply across all schools, institutes and centres, detailed prescriptive guidelines are unlikely to be helpful, given the diverse nature of the University, its schools, institutes, centres and disciplines. (6) Both the principles and other considerations set out below need to take into account the availability and use of various tools and methods used by schools, institutes and centres across the University to identify, measure and compare academic staff workloads. (7) It is essential that the allocation of workload within schools, institutes and centres is equitable. The allocation of academic duties should be performed on a basis that recognises and promotes the University’s policies relating to equity as set out in the University’s policies, procedures and guidelines on Equity and Diversity. Equity does not imply that all staff perform the same tasks in the same proportions, but rather that a roughly equal load (taken across all areas of work and over a reasonable period of time) is allocated to, and undertaken by, each staff member. There should be reasonable consideration of family and personal responsibilities, early career status, fraction of appointment, etc. (8) Over a period of time, the duties which staff are expected to perform should strike an appropriate balance among teaching (including supervision), scholarship or research, and service and engagement for each individual (relevant to their designation as Teaching and Research, Teaching-Focused, Clinical Academic or Research Only staff) so that the overall allocated work carried out by the combined staff meets the goals and objectives of the school, institute or centre, and the agreed professional development needs of staff. (9) The importance of balance means that: (10) The overall balance of activities is also likely to include both duties allocated by the Head of School or Director (such as teaching, supervision and administration) and those activities in which the amount of work involved is largely self-determined (such as research and some forms of professional service). The balance between these kinds of activity should not be such as to remove the opportunity to exercise the high level of professional autonomy which is one of the most valued characteristics of academic work. (11) On the other hand, the exercise of professional autonomy implies a responsibility to perform, and balance cannot be interpreted as a right to undertake certain kinds of activity irrespective of performance or irrespective of required duties. Staff are expected to perform satisfactorily in all areas, whether it is workload specifically allocated by the Head of School or Director, or activity of a more general, largely self-directed nature. (12) The actual hours of work for academic staff, or the span of hours, are not prescribed, nor is it always easy to quantify the work associated with particular activities. However, there is an expectation of reasonableness in the total work required of an individual under a workload allocation policy. (13) The Enterprise Agreement provides that the agreed maximum number of hours which a full-time academic can be required to work in a calendar year is 1725. This would equate under a workload allocation model to a maximum of approximately 37.5 hours per week over a 46-week working year (52 weeks less annual leave and public holidays). (14) In the context of overall allocated workload, notions of what is reasonable will emerge from the methods agreed to calculate comparative workloads of academic staff and present them publicly within the school, institute or centre. This practice will highlight changes in workload over time and will facilitate discussion of what is reasonable within the respective school, institute or centre context. (15) Whatever norms of reasonableness emerge, staff should not need to exceed them in order to achieve a satisfactory level of performance. Allocated loads should not inhibit staff from doing more to achieve their personal academic and career goals. (16) The method used within each school, institute or centre to calculate and allocate comparative workloads of staff must be transparent, developed in consultation with staff, readily understood and be in a form that can be presented publicly within the school, institute or centre. The method used should be appropriate to the discipline. (17) Where it is feasible and agreed by the school, institute or centre as part of the method of calculating comparative workloads of academic staff, workloads relating to teaching will be expressed in equivalent hours, but can also be expressed in other ways, such as through the use of a workload tool. (18) Academic activities are traditionally categorised under the headings of teaching, research and service/engagement. However, within these categories there is a wide range of activities which academic staff may undertake, depending on the nature of their academic appointment. These include, but are not restricted to, the following. (19) It is important to note that not all the activities listed above would necessarily form part of allocated workloads within a school, institute or centre and, depending on the school, institute or centre and its strategic objectives, there could be others included. Some activities (e.g. in the research category) would form part of what an academic staff member chooses to spend time on, rather than the activity being part of their allocated workload. (20) It is common practice to moderate the variety of academic activities using other criteria (such as class size, types of assessment items, types of lectures, supervision types, nature and quality of research outputs etc.). Different schools, institutes or centres will approach these matters differently, depending on the discipline and the school’s, institute’s or centre’s strategic objectives. Weights can be attached to the types of academic activities accordingly. The patterns of academic activity vary widely across disciplines. While there are common elements, the balance between them may differ from one discipline to another. Furthermore, the amount of time required for each activity may be dependent on the discipline. (21) Because of differences among disciplines, it is not always possible to quantify the work associated with a particular academic activity (e.g. giving a lecture, supervising a PhD student) in a way that is valid for the whole University. However, it is usually possible to do this locally within a school, institute or centre, and it is expected that there will be similarities across related disciplines. (22) Weighting can also take account of such factors as the likelihood that there is generally more work involved in designing a new course than in taking over an existing one, and there is generally more work involved in taking over an existing course from another staff member than in a staff member repeating a course which he or she has previously taught. (23) University staff represent all stages of career development, from initial appointment to retirement. The University’s expectations of staff legitimately vary according to level of experience and appointment. Such expectations are set out in more detail in University policies, in particular in the Criteria for Academic Performance Policy (24) At the same time, staff expectations of the University may vary according to the stage of career development. In particular, junior staff may expect duties to be allocated with a view to nurturing their development, and all staff can expect an opportunity to demonstrate performance which leads to promotion. Such expectations are recognised in the University’s Staff Development Policy. (25) Heads of School and Directors are responsible to Senate (through the Executive Deans and the Vice-Chancellor) for the effective management of their schools, institutes or centres. Managing workloads is part of that responsibility. (26) At the same time, workload allocation must be strategic (that is, aligned with key budget and reputational drivers for the school, institute or centre), and designed to help the school, institute or centre meet its goals and priorities. Workload allocation must also be geared to core school, institute or centre activities rather than to all possible academic activities in which individual staff might choose to engage. In this context, the school-based and institute-based Performance Frameworks are relevant. (27) Many staff undertake paid consultancy or other outside work within the limits of the Consultancy, Secondary Employment and Internal Work Policy. (28) The following specific matters should be considered when developing the school, institute or centre workload allocations: (29) A web-based workload recognition tool is currently under development by the University for use by schools, institutes and centres in workload allocation. The University is developing this tool to assist schools, institutes and centres with academic workload measurement and allocation, and to provide a simple but detailed and transparent method of identifying, measuring and comparing academic workloads. (30) Other existing workload allocation methods and tools are also available within schools, institutes and centres and can continue to be used. (31) Should a staff member have concerns about the workload that has been allocated to them by their supervisor or manager, the staff member may raise the matter in the first instance through the Staff Grievance Resolution Procedure. Under this Procedure, the first step is for the staff member to approach their supervisor. Should the matter not be resolved by the end of Step 2 of the Staff Grievance Resolution Procedure or later, the staff member may choose to move to the Dispute Settlement procedure under the Enterprise Agreement. Any steps taken initially under the Staff Grievance Resolution Procedure will constitute steps taken under the Dispute Settlement procedure. (32) Changes to these Guidelines will be subject to consultation with the Academic Staff Consultative Committee and affected academic staff.Workload Allocation for Academic Staff Guideline
Section 1 - Purpose and Objectives
Section 2 - Definitions, Terms, Acronyms
Top of Page
Term
Definition
Enterprise Agreement
The University of Queensland Enterprise Agreement 2021-2026, or as amended or replaced
Director
Director of Institute or Centre
Head
Head of School
Section 3 - Guidelines Scope/Coverage
Section 4 - Guidelines Statement
Section 5 - Principles
Equity
Balance
Total Load and Reasonableness
Transparency
Section 6 - Measuring Workloads
Variety of Academic Activities
Teaching
Research
Service with the University
Service and Engagement (Unremunerated) Outside the University
Weighting Academic Activities
Section 7 - Allocating Workloads
Career Development and Aspirations
School, Institute or Centre Goals and Priorities
Consultancy, Secondary Employment and Internal Work
Other Matters to be Considered
Top of PageSection 8 - Implementation
Workload Recognition Tool
Management of the Guidelines
View current
This is not the document currently in effect. To view the current approved version, refer to the Current Version tab from the menu bar above.