Returning to my research career after an eight-year break, I encountered the term early career researcher (ECR) for the first time. Initially, I didn’t realise it applied to me. It had been more than 15 years since I earned my PhD, and, apart from during maternity leave, I’d worked more or less continuously (although admittedly not in a way that is stereotypical of an academic career).
Finding a consistent definition for ECR is no easy task. It mostly depends on self-identification; if you identify as an ECR, then you probably are one. If you don’t but are still on a fixed-term contract, it is unclear where you fit. This type of ambiguity is something an inclusive research culture should be moving away from.
The term “ECR” is a fairly recent addition to the research career vocabulary, and the reasons for introducing it were well-intended. Expecting researchers at early stages of their careers to compete with well-established researchers for funding was deemed, rightly, unfair. In addition, describing researchers as younger is a form of age discrimination that is no longer openly endorsed.
Unfortunately, though, the term ECR starts to fall short with careers that don’t conform to the deeply ingrained academic ideal of a linear career track. Implicit in the ECR role is the notion of career progression: that the researcher will move from early career to further stages of the career path. Employing researchers on fixed-term contracts means that for most progressing linearly is just not possible for a multitude of reasons, not least because career decisions are not made in isolation and must be offset against other life considerations. The overall effect is that a researcher’s career starts to extend temporally from the early to mid-stage, possibly even later stage, along with compounding of their skill set. Defining this group of highly skilled researchers as “early career” seems somewhat contradictory, as they are often more mid-career than their peers at the traditional mid-stage.
To date, only one study has been published on longer-term researchers at the fixed-term stage, naming them long-term research staff (LTRS) and defined as having “a minimum of eight years post-PhD or highest degree in employment on research-only temporary contracts”. A third of research staff (34 per cent) have been employed on temporary (fixed-term) contracts at one or more higher education institutions for more than 10 years, according to Vitae figures. But this group of researchers is often overlooked in the broader research ecosystem, with the focus instead on ECRs. Because of their longer career paths, LTRS tend to be at a different stage of life and are more likely to have committed to a research career. Supporting LTRS and their careers, therefore, requires different considerations.
Technological innovations in the workspace have transformed how research is done. Yet our career paths and workplace habits, envisioned more than 40 years ago, have not benefited from the same transformation. With rising retirement ages, more women in the workforce, the economic need for dual-income families and shifting work attitudes, it must surely be time to reimagine research careers.
Language
Language is critical for inclusion of any under-represented group. Endorsing a term to describe these researchers would enhance their visibility and inclusion in research culture policies and practices.
- Resource collection: Is your academic career cleared for take-off?
- What is tenure in higher education – and how to get it
- Pathways to prosperity in casual academia
Data
Gathering and monitoring data are necessary to understand the extent of LTRS in a broader context and bolster evidence on research careers; to challenge biases and ensure that LTRS are not ignored or othered by the research community and to determine the impact of policies and practices on institutional practices.
Institutional practices
From a business perspective, the use of fixed-term contracts is meant to be temporary, a safeguard for the organisation before committing to costly permanent employment. In academic research, fixed-term contracts are seen as the only way to job security. As 13 per cent of Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa) researchers on short-term contracts of 10 years or more have been employed at the same institution, institutions should be transparent on when the “probationary period” will end.
Reskilling
Closing the door on a research career is no easier for those on fixed-term contracts than for “established” researchers. Funding for professional development opportunities or coaching could help LTRS transition their skill sets to other job sectors. Undertaking an internship or volunteering in a new job sector are less likely options for LTRS.
Building sufficient career capital on a backdrop of precarity and insecurity is not a linear process. Although limited by a small sample size, the only study on LTRS found that they were mostly women whose caring responsibilities extended their career paths. If this is reflected more broadly, it may speak to the stubbornly persistent challenges that these groups face in the research environment. To sustainably harness the full potential of researchers and keep pace with the needs of an evolving workforce, we must include all researchers. Using the correct language should be a first step towards this. The term ECR is a useful step away from age-related language and towards equity, but it does not capture everyone. Creating a more inclusive research culture requires addressing the needs of LTRS as well.
Rachel James is a researcher at the University of Edinburgh.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment