2. 1
Contents
1) Project title.………………………………………………………...............................2
2) Aims of the project…………………………………………………………………...2
3) Project activity………………………………………………………………………..2
4) Research methods…………………………………………………………………….3
4.1) Existing RCCs team....…………………………………………………………..3
4.2) New RCCs team...……………………………………………………………….5
4.3) Publicity team...……………………………………………………………….....5
5) Findings/Results………………………………………………………………………...…6
5.1) Existing RCCs team…………………………………………………….…….....6
5.2) New RCCs team……………………………………………………………..…..8
5.3) Publicity team………..……………………………………………………...….10
6) Conclusions.……………………………………………………………………………....10
7) Recommendations……………………………………………………………………..…10
Access to information…………………………………………………………………….....11
Appendices……………………………………………………………………………..…....12
3. 2
Project Duration: From 5th
May 2015 till 31st
July 2015
1) Project Title- Post Graduate Research-Career Destination (PGR-CD)
2) Aims- The project was intended to increase the number of Researcher Career Contacts
(RCCs) in the Careers and Employability Centre (CEC) database there by embedding the
upkeep and development of the RCC as part of the overall CEC provision, and also to
increase the number of services RCC’s could offer for the benefit of Loughborough
University’s post graduate research (PGR) students and staff. The information generated
from this project is intended to promote the career development of Loughborough
University’s PGRs by facilitating their career decision making.
3) Project activity- The project work was undertaken by 7 Loughborough University’s
PGRs under the supervision of a project manager. Team members at their discretion, were
free to choose to the hours and place to commence work of this project, however under the
stipulation that they do not work for more than 6 hours per week (as per Loughborough
University’s regulation). Following are few approaches adopted by the PGR-CD team
members:
At the end of each week every team member needed to report to the administrator in
CEC (designated by the project manager) about the work undertaken for the
respective weeks along with the time consumption.
The PGR-CD team members commence work together as a team by dividing the roles
and responsibilities equally among themselves based on the project requirement.
Work in conjunction with the project manager and regularly report progress of the
project work. Any concerns were to be reported to the project manager if not
manageable by the PGR-CD group members.
Understand the needs of the current Loughborough University post graduate students,
as to what they would like to see in the profiles of RCCs, as well as what kind of
services they would like to obtain from the ‘Researcher Career Contacts’, through
survey- data collection (this project activity was not conducted as it was intended at
the beginning of the project due to time restrictions, instead a brain storming session
among the PGRs who worked in the PGR-CD project and few in-formal talks with
their colleagues helped to determine the required aspects)
Increase the awareness of the RCCs’ resource mainly for the benefit of Loughborough
University’s PhD students
4. 3
To effectively manage the project work, based on the recommendation of the project
manager, the PGR-CD project work was divided into following three group:
A) Existing RCCs team- Purpose of this team was to contact the existing RCCs in
the CEC database, by which the RCCs could be persuaded to agree to continue to
be an RCC. In addition to this, increase the number of RCCs in the CEC database
by contacting those RCCs who were contacted in the previous project but were
not added to the CEC database. Further, this team was also responsible for seeking
a number of services from the agreed RCCs, like; talks, work shadow, internships,
mentoring and attending employer event etc. for the benefit of Loughborough
University’s post graduate research (PGR) students and staff.
B) New RCCs team- To increase the list of RCCs in the CEC database by
approaching new potential RCCs, by which these potential RCCs could be
persuaded to agree to be an RCC and also to seek for a number of services like;
talks, work shadow, internships, mentoring and attending employer event etc. for
the benefit of Loughborough University’s post graduate research (PGR) students
and staff.
C) Publicity team- Publicise the information and services offered by CEC, which
could effectively reach out to the current Loughborough University post graduate
students, and enable them to utilize these information and services to guide their
own career.
4) Research Methods
This section of the project report will discuss the research methods employed the three
different sub-groups of PGR-CD
4.1) Existing RCCs team- Team members in this group contacted those RCCs whose
information was already available with the CEC owing to previous RCC project
conducted in 2013, and were considered as “Existing RCCs”. They were further
divided into two sub-categories as follows:
a) Online Existing RCCs – Are those who agreed to be an RCC in the previous
RCC project (2013) and have provided their academic and career information
which was then made available in a short anonymous career profile under the
category ‘Past PhD and Researcher Career Contacts’’ on the Careers on-line
website, visible only to Loughborough students, graduates and staff.
b) Offline Existing RCCs – Are those, whose information was gathered during
5. 4
the previous RCC project but their profiles were not made available on the
Careers On-line website.
For this project, the research was conducted in a phased manner involving a series of
sequential steps: Primarily, a list of RCCs was compiled by combining all the lists (RCCs)
available from the previous project’s database. Duplicate contacts were removed and a list
was finalized, including a total of 150 contacts out of which 43 were identified as “Online”
and the rest 107 were “Offline” existing RCCs.
This was followed by designing the research plan based on the available data. The
plan was chalked out in three phases that are elaborated in the following table (no. 1).
Table 1: Research Phases for Existing Contacts
Phases Steps Tasks
Phase I –
Online
Existing
RCCs
1 Initial contact was made with the “Online RCCs” by sending
an email to see if they still agree to be a research career
contact.
2 Thank you email was sent to those who replied positively to
the email.
3 Those who agreed to continue as RCC were asked to update
their profiles through an online survey. Information about the
survey and its link was emailed to them.
4 Those who could not be contacted through email (failed
delivery) or responded negatively were contacted by
telephone (if the number is available). Further, another email
was sent to those who had not updated their profile through
the online survey.
Phase II -
Offline
Existing
RCCs
1 Initial contact was made with the “Offline RCCs” by sending
an email to see if they still agree to be a research career
contact.
2 Thank you email was sent to those who replied positively and
agreed to be an RCC.
3 Those who agreed to continue as RCC were asked to update
their profiles through an online survey. Information about the
survey and its link was emailed to them.
6. 5
4 Those who could not be contacted through email (failed
delivery) or responded negatively were contacted by
telephone (if the number is available). Further, another email
was sent to those who had not updated their profile through
the online survey.
Phase III –
Information
Extraction
from
Surveys
1 Information was extracted from the online surveys to update
the online profiles of the existing RCCs and to create new
profiles of those whose were not in the CEC’s online
database.
2 The information extracted from surveys was summarised and
added to the CEC’s online database.
Initial email to existing online and offline RCCs was drafted in a way such that, only if they
replied stating that they were not interested in being an RCC did we not pursue these contacts
further, while the others were contacted again in the subsequent phases such as for surveys.
4.2) New RCCs team
One of the main tasks of this project was to find new RCCs and enhance the communication
between the CEC and RCCs. The main search for new RCCs was conducted using the
internet. The following methods have been used to source new RCCs for this project:
- Everyone who was working in this project asked their departments (including the
PGR administrator) for further contacts.
- PhD students and RA (Research Associate) representatives of each department were
also contacted.
- Using internet search engines: mainly Google and LinkedIn search.
A LinkedIn premium account was created in order to get in contact with some of the users.
In total around 140 contacts was found after numerous searches. Care was taken to ensure
that none of the contacts were repeated or were already present as existing contacts.
Even though the deadline for this project is 31st
July 2015, survey distributed to the existing
and new RCCs is extended till 31st
Dec 2015, so that any new data obtained from the existing
or new RCCs after 31st
July 2015 could be updated to the CEC database, as some of the
automated email replies mentioned that they are on long leave.
4.3) Publicity team
7. 6
At various opportunities, the Postgraduate (PGR) Survey and Publicity team sought feedback
from the Career Destination team and the project manager.
In an attempt to collect data from the current Loughborough University’s PhD students a
survey was designed to utilise the findings to prepare another survey for new and existing
RCCs. However, after preparing the survey it could not be distributed to the current
Loughborough University’s PhD students due to time restrictions, instead a brain storming
session among the PhD students who worked in the PGR-CD project and few in-formal talks
with their colleagues was considered to prepare the survey required for the existing and new
RCCs. Appendix 4 and 5 shows the respective surveys prepared for current Loughborough
University’s PhD students and the one for the existing and new RCCs. Some of the survey
questions were drafted not to discourage RCCs from completing the survey, noting that the
surveys that take too long to complete seldom yield high participants, but to get as much
information as possible from the contacts. A complete range of questions were prepared such
that it does not compromise privacy, and at the same time would yield enough information
for PhD students by which they would be interested in making contact with the RCC. One
line of questioning was incorporated into the survey to find out about the RCCs’ work
placement activity during their course of study. This was done to help out the PGR WP team
with responses on their activity.
In addition to above, the components of the publicity team’s tasks were the RCC postcard,
banner and PhD journey profile (case study). They are available in appendix 6, 7 and 8
respectively; appendix 7 contains an alternative banner design for the CEC. As a starting
point for the banner design, the project manager provided a brief design which is a similar
material targeted for undergraduates. A brief summary of the purpose of the RCC database
and the CEC’s contact details are provided on the postcard; the banner was designed to be
used in career fairs and any such events that is deemed appropriate by CEC. The aim of the
PhD journey profile is to provide anecdotal evidence of the researchers’ experiences, to
Loughborough University’s PhD students and research staff, during and after their doctorate
programme. The publicity materials were designed on PowerPoint. The postcard and banner
were to be submitted by the 13th of July due to funding deadlines. At the time of writing, the
postcard and banner have been printed.
5) Findings/Results
This section of the project report will discuss the findings/results of each of the three different
sub-groups of PGR-CD.
8. 7
5.1) Existing RCCs team
Results after the initial contact with the existing RCCs (both online and offline) is presented
in table no. 2, out of 107 offline RCCs, 11 did not have any contact details and 5 did not
have email address (only telephone number was available)
Table 2 – Results of initial contact with Existing RCCs (online and offline)
Phase
Initial
contact
by
email
Email
failed /
no email
address
Automati
c Out of
office
reply
with long
leave
Thank
you
email to
Positive
response
No
respon
se
Not
intere
sted Surve
y sent
Phase I
–
Online
Existin
g
RCCs
43 6 2 13 22
-
35
Phase
II -
Offline
Existin
g
RCCs
107 47 - 2 55
3
57
A summary of results of telephonic contacts, with the existing RCCs (both online and offline)
to whom email delivery was not successful or those who had only telephone numbers is given
in table no. 3, out of these RCCs; voicemail was left to 2 online RCCs and there was no
response and 4 RCCs did not have telephone numbers. Among offline RCCs, voicemail was
left to 11 RCCs but was not responded, 4 did not have telephone numbers and 17 numbers
were either not recognized or incorrect number or were not reachable.
Table 3 – Results of telephonic contact with Existing RCCs (online and offline)
Phase
Email
failed /
only
phone
numbers
No
phone
number
Left
voice
message
Number not
recognized/
Incorrect
number/
Not
reachable
Negative
response
Positive
response
Phase I
– Online
Existing
RCCs
6 4 2 - - -
Phase II
- Offline
Existing
35 4 11 17 1 2
9. 8
RCCs
After the online survey email was sent to 92 RCCs (online and offline), 22 online RCCs have
updated their profile through the online survey which was made available to them, and one
offline RCC has filled the survey questionnaire. Among which, twelve are working in
academic roles and eleven are working in the industry. Even though one of the offline RCC
agreed during the telephonic contact, but have not filled the online survey. Attempts were
made to contact that RCC by telephone and email but has not responded. As described in this
section of the project report, appendix 1 and 2 shows the existing RCCs list, and their email
delivery and call status, as well as survey email and updated online profile report.
5.2) New RCCs team
It was found that getting in contact with academics is considerably easier than getting in
contact with people who are working for commercial industries. In order to be able to contact
commercial industry contacts, generally the process is to go through their human resources.
This was tried on some occasions however the response rate was almost negligible. The short
duration of the project meant that we had to put a deadline for updating the database (17th of
July). All responses (until 21st July) after the 17th could not be updated on the database;
however they have been accounted for in the graphs that follow. The list of new RCCs with
their contact details is shown in Appendix 3, some of the results regarding new RCCs data
obtained from the online survey conducted is shown below with graphical presentation.
Many members of LinkedIn are registered as premium members and in order to contact them,
a premium membership was obtained. The response rate from postgraduate administrators,
PhD students and RA representatives were considerably low as they did not have access to
the
Availability for
further contact
yes
no
Does your
organisation
actively recruit…
Yes
No
10. 9
alumni database. The most common suggestion was to get in touch with the alumni office.
Survey responses of the existing and new RCCs were updated to the CEC database as and
when the data was available to the team members.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Mechanical
engineering
Electronic,
Electrical &
System
engineering
Sport and
Exercise
science
What was your field
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
<2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years >20 years
How long have you worked for this
organisation?
Work duration
Job title range
Research
fellow
Senior
academic
Lecturer
Other
How did you
find out
about your…
Online
11. 10
5.3) Publicity team
The existing and new RCCs survey responses indicates that the level of participation was
encouraging. The CEC banner design and RCC postcard were designed to accurately reflect
the aim of CEC and offer more information to current PhD students. This was carried out by
analysing the past banner design and postcards, and changing some of the designs and
information therein to reflect the work of CEC. After carefully considering all the profiles of
existing and new RCCS, a case study of one of the RCCs was done to give an insight into
what the RCC is all about, with the intention of capturing the attention of PhD students.
6) Conclusions
Amidst the challenges of persuading the existing and new RCCs and the time restrictions to
the team members, the ‘existing RCCs’ sub-group were able to achieve its target of
contacting all existing contacts and have persuaded 22 online existing RCCs to update their
profiles and have convinced one offline existing RCC to join the initiative. The ‘new RCCs’
sub-group were able to add 37 new RCCs to the CEC’s database, few of the contacts in both
existing and new RCCs sub-groups were unable to reply within the deadline (17-07-2015) as
their automated email reply suggested that they are either on annual or maternity leave which
extends well beyond the deadline. Most of the RCCs (existing and new) go on to work in
academics. Few of them work in commercial industry for a while, however, return to
academics at some stage of their career. The results provided above are what could be
produced as an outcome, within the given time frame, should there was more time provided
greater results with respect to number of RCCs could have been generated.
7) Recommendations
0
5
10
15
20
Before 2000 2000-2005 2005-2010 2010-2015
PhD graduation year
PhD graduation year
12. 11
Projects such as these must be of longer duration in order to have a significant improvement
mainly in terms of yielding better results with quantity, and to certain effect it could affect the
overall quality of the project as well.
There needs to be some improvement on the existing CEC-RCC database in order to make it
more user friendly. For example, navigation through the anonymous RCC profiles, by
categorizing the RCC profiles as per their work industry and the country in which they are
working, etc.
Produce a compiled list of anonymous RCC on a PDF or Word document which could be
made available on-line or at the CECs desk, for the benefit of the PhD students who could
access the RCCs’ details without having to log-on to Careers Online
Targeting EngD graduates could be beneficial to students who are looking for a similar
career.
Providing administrative access to more team members to the CEC data base would have
been beneficial to divide work equally among the team members.
Increase awareness among the Loughborough University PhD students about the RCC
initiative, as quite a few of the PhD students who were contacted during the course of this
project were unaware of this facility available to them. This could be achieved by:
- Collaborating with Loughborough University Students’ Union to distribute the post-
cards in their building and more promotion via social media
- A banner could be kept in the CEC building ground floor and/or the new graduates’
building to raise awareness
- Publishing the publicity material across various media platforms (online and paper
based resource)
- Liaising with postgraduate halls of residence (John Phillips Hall)
- Contact ‘career representation’, both undergraduate and postgraduate courses, of the
departments to promote the RCC within their department
Access to information (files, surveys and documents)
Shared network drive: (W:) (ws1.lboro.ac.uk) CECPGRProjects
Folder Name: Career Destinations Group and Project report and Appendices
13. 12
Appendices
Existing RCCs list
July 2015_appendix
1
Existing RCCs list
July 2015-_appendix
2
New RCCs list July
2015_ appendix 3.xls
3
PhD students
survey questions_ap
4
RCC survey
questions_ appendi
5
Key-terms in
questionnaires_ App
6
Alternative banner
design_appendix 7.p
7
Postcard_appendix
8.pdf
8
