Report Atelier Prosperity Atelier Prosperity, 29 th of April, 2pm -6pm at the U-Residence •
Theme and process: o This Atelier was lead by Valéry Ann Jacobs, who’s equally leading the taskforce Interpersonal Relationships, appointed in the aftermath of the #MeToo-case(s) involving our university, with the support of Marketing, Communications and Engagement (Marcom) and the project The World Needs You o The theme that we tackled in this Prosperity-atelier was transgressive behaviour within our university, more specifically through cases of interpersonal relationships (with or without hierarchy dynamics) where buttom-up input was needed to achieve and derive concrete action points or policies o
•
• • •
These cases of interpersonal relationships were discussed: ▪ What if someone is part an evaluation or promotion board in which a child of their own is evaluated? ▪ What if someone is part of a board that makes decisions about a department in which a family member works? ▪ What if a professor who has a consensual intimate/sexual relationship with a PhD student be their supervisor? ▪ Should action be taken when there are rumours in a department about a colleague's relationship with someone at work (whether it be extramarital or not)? ▪ Social media usage and connections between students and teaching staff/professors: guidelines to establish boundaries? ▪ A member of the academic staff initiates an intimate, emotional and sexual relationship with a student/doctoral candidate. There is a certain hierarchy in academic position but both parties consented to this relationship. What consequences do you foresee if: • The academic member works at university A, and the student studies at university B? • Both are attached to the same university, but the academic member works at Faculty A, and the student studies at University B, so that in practice they never come into professional contact with each other? • (Student version) Both are attached to the same university and Faculty. The academic staff member teaches the student and examines the course. • d(Doctoral student version) Both are attached to the same university, faculty and research group. The academic staff member is (or is not) the supervisor of the PhD student.
We worked through and tested the Flanders DC GPS-method in which each of the 4 groups during 4 different phases, were asked to switch tables and built upon the ideas of the previous group, resulting into 4 different project canvases (with their accompanying flipcharts and separate ideas on sticky notes) below. Participants: about 22 participants in total Number of project canvases at the end of the workshop: 4 General feedback from the participants:
1
Report Atelier Prosperity o
o
o o
The consensus: on the one hand the process is pretty tiresome, exhausting even as it requires at each phase to reset the thinking process and built upon other ideas. On the other hand it enabled to gain perspective of other groups Even though this brainstorming process was intense, there was a sense of hope and optimism at the end the session and a feeling of utility with great, direct involvement that might lead to change Important for the group dynamic is to have a mix of several stakeholders or layers within our university: both staff, academic staff and students need to be involved Everyone agrees that following up this brainstorm, clear communication about transgressive behaviour and policies are crucial
2
Report Atelier Prosperity Project Canvas 1 NOW: Mandatory awareness + training for all ASAP: VUB has to make it happen
1. Proposal of policy: name of the guideline, definition and context of the situation Starting point: VUB Code of Conduct update/relaunch
2. Solutions and people to involve to have success - Internal communications - Get everyone signed up = “Big Bang” go live
3. Avantages, disadvantages, pitfalls and barriers +
-
+ Clarity
- Need to be credible
+ Transparency
- Effective speakup
+ Consistency
- Whistleblowes protection
+ Walk the talk
- Resources needed to investigate - “Loss of staff”
4. Next steps, milestones and action plan -> Task Force - Targets set - Timeline - Budget - Visibility - Approachability
3
Report Atelier Prosperity Flip Chart of Project Canvas 1 RED
YELLOW
- Mandatory awareness & bystander training for - Advisory social media guidelines all staff-members -> explicit upfront training before exams - VUB has to make good on promises Awareness and or bystander training for all staff members -> can be just 1 session -> mandatory -> with examples
VUB has to ->
Equality team has to make good on ther promises/plans
- Change in mentality & (work) culture - In case of rumours Support by HR if rumours are true -> personal -> work-life & colleagues -> avoid conflict
There’s a difference between phd students or professors/colleagues on the one hand or a student on the other
- Advisory guidelines could work - More info should be available surrounding transgression through social media
Bespreken als het negatief is -> pestgedrag, lastigvallen -> dan melden - Switch supervision -> involved person only “consultant” Ideally switch supervision, if they’re on essential expert make them a secondary (-> informed) supervisior
4
Report Atelier Prosperity Attachments Project Canvas 1 What if a professor has a consensual intimate/sexual relationship with a PhD student and is their supervisor? - Stay objective! 1) secondary supervisor 2) cursus/praatgroep voor supervisor over hoe omgaan met situatie Wie gaat melden dat ze een seksuele relatie hebben? -> iedereen gaat geheim houden - Make it personal (what if it was your loved one in this situation) - -> during PhD -> relationship develops -> PhD starting -> existing relationship NO - No?
How can we successfully convince people within all layers of the VUB that everybody ought to be aware of the dynamics of interpersonal relations ant that transgressions can occur? - Provide concrete (that happened) & the consequences
Social media usage and connections between students and teaching professors: guidelines to establish boundaries? - Interaction on more serious/professional posts is OK, but not on personal/”loose” posts - There’s a difference between personal profiles (tiktok, facebook,…) and professional ones - PhD of hoger is iets anders dan student - Guidelines should be present, but no hard rules. Nonetheless, recommend actions are welcome - No personal messaging as source - Importance to maintain professional & guidelines should promote this
Should action be taken when there are rumours in a department about a colleague’s relationship with someone at work (whether it be extramarital or not)? - Is a relationship present between figures of authority? Still, don’t take everything for granted! - RUMOURS ARE NOT PROOF - Don’t promote gossip culture - Supervisor/ HR worker could have an one-on-one conversation
5
Report Atelier Prosperity
Student oriented about hierarchy 1) 2) 3) 4)
We don’t foresee any negative consequences in terms of Ethics and Academically (see above) High risk of abuse High risk of abuse -> solution? = change mentor
6
Report Atelier Prosperity
Project Canvas 2 1. Proposal of policy: name of the guideline, definition and context of the situation Guidelines in Maintaining a professional PhD-Supervisor relationship; GIMPR Guidelines 2. Solutions and people to involve to have success - Solutions -> remove supervisor + replace -> in core position? -> place in ‘advisory’ role -> independent of computersystem instead: -> report relationship -> (exit talk w/) - Context: you have an intimate/ sexual relationship with your supervisor/promotor - Who to involve for success & why: -> faculty-bound research commission -> legal, Marcom, M&O (HR), VUB Academic community Concerning consensual intimate relations 3. Avantages, disadvantages, pitfalls and barriers - Solutions and people to involve to have success: 1) 2) in het vereiste pakket van ZAP, leidinggevenden, ATP, OAP,… passend in VUB visie 3) vormingen op casus niveau 4) bij onboarding bovenstaande vormingen verplichten involve the entire academic community - Pitfalls 1) Fighting against the old culture, people not taking it serious… 4. Next steps, milestones and action plan -> follow up for recurrent cases -> normal, serious relationship -> students = dating pool -> normalize & standardize procedure -> monitoring of both parties via independent computersystem
7
Report Atelier Prosperity Flipchart 1 of Project Canvas 2 - Title: GMPRs Guidelines in maintaining a professional PhD-supervisor relationship -> concerning consensual intimate relations -> relatationship -> consensual relationships -> hierarchy bound -> detach -> no predatory relationships -> guideline procedure, fun? Catchy?
Steps
Control
Boundaries
Maintenance Limiting
Trajectory
WeAreVUB
VUB academic community M&O (HR) Marcom
- Who to reach out @? PhD, supervisor, PhD students, future PhD students
8
Report Atelier Prosperity Flip Chart 2 of Project Canvas 2
- Child Define conflict situation
- Child
- Awareness Normalize speaking up
- Awareness
- Supervisor
- Supervisor - No (me) - Risky (him) -> if things end up badly -> remain professional Make rule clear
- Rumours Consider ‘culture’ issues to address too
- Rumours Rumours are a problem on their own -> action needed; initiative by VUB needed Tools to tackle issues What problem are we focused on? What rule is at stake?
9
Report Atelier Prosperity Attachment Project Canvas 2 What if someone is on a evaluation of promotion board in which a child of their own is evaluated? - Vaste criteria waarop je persoon evalueert -> objectiever; maar je kan niet alles oplijsten. Een algemene waakzaamheid is nodig - Beter als iemand anders indien er alternatief is -> er moet een cultuur van introspectie zijn. Personen die te nauw betrokken zijn moeten die zorg uitspreken zodat het ter discussie staat - Altijd in groep -> externen zijn nuttig om de reflectie te stimuleren - Parent has to leave when discussion about child -> others have to speak freely
How can we successfully convince people within all layers of the VUB that everybody ought to be aware of the dynamics of interpersonal relations ant that transgressions can occur? 1) VL: vragen in welke mate bepaald gedrag acceptabel -> later over discussiëren -> VRAGENLIJST ANONIEM 2) Experten over laten praten (-> meer, blijft meer hangen, maakt meer indruk) + RESULTATEN VRAGEN 3) Praatgroep, workshops -> komen altijd zelfde mensen verplicht maken? -> bij een les iedereen, vooral docenten verplicht geen office mail pers faculteit -> kleinschaliger organiseren - Wat is er nodig om de mentaliteit van bagatelliseren (self-) victimblaming… om te buigen (onderzoek) + lange termijn beleidskader met meetbare KPI’s? - Make it more visible -> posters? - Educate on power dynamics -> don’t abuse (being preventive) - Movies/video’s showing the consequences of transgression (on campus?) Should action be taken when there are rumours in a department about a colleague’s relationship with someone at work (whether it be extramarital or not)? - Geen enkel actie ondernemen (enkel als dingen fout dreigen te gaan) -> big risk too late - What type of action are we talking about? - “Rumours” -> find out the truth with a conversation between both parties - depends on company-culture (family culture or corporate culture) - Have a “safespace” or person of trust to consult - Cultuur: België -> zwijgcultuur = meer uitspreken “safespace” - Wie, wat, waar, wanneer Wie -> voert gesprek Wat -> roddel x waarheid Wanneer -> wie beslist wanneer het fout gaat? - Extramaterial? -> bijkomend element -> morele kwestie ipv “GOG” -> niets moet doen? -> privé-sfeer -> geen actie 10
Report Atelier Prosperity - procedure for transfer when promotor is in relationship with (PhD-)student
What if a professor has a consensual intimate/sexual relationship with a PhD student and is their supervisor? -> Opleiding voor heel team “relaties” op het werk - Verplichte vormingen die in het verplichte “vereisten” pakket zitten van ZAP, leidinggevenden - -> vormingen op casusniveau Iedere VUB-staff verplichten tot vorming, vertrekkende van een VUB-visie rond interpersoonlijke relaties - Co-supervisor toevoegen (3e partij) -> gezien “evaluatie” element) - Meldingsplicht -> relatie aangeven tussen PhD’s en professor -> acties -> kunnen verschillen
Social media usage and connections between students and teaching professors: guidelines to establish boundaries? -> Short term clear and accountable - no flirty messages - awareness campaign of what it means to be linked to professional workshops -> think about what you’re sharing -> do you want your student or professor to see it? -> make an informed decision when adding people “Do you want your supervisor to see your hangover pics”
Should action be taken when there are rumours in a department about a colleague’s relationship with someone at work (whether it be extramarital or not)? -> if the rumours are systemic and concerning parties with a conflict of interest -> short term taking action -> long term: work on open work culture where people don’t spread unfounded gossip Convincing people of the necessity
Maintaining professional relationship with supervisor. What/bounder Maintaining professional boundaries when entering an interpersonal relationship with Maintaining a professional supervision – phd student relationships
11
Report Atelier Prosperity -> consensual intimate relations
12
Report Atelier Prosperity Project Canvas 3
1. Proposal of policy: name of the guideline, definition and context of the situation Policy: aanmoedigen ervoor uitkomen Relaties tussen personeel bij HR gelinkt aan sensibiliserings campagne -> to lessen the taboo surrounding these relationships, less shame no more will come forward + bij HR kenbaar maken van mogelijke valkuilen 2. Solutions and people to involve to have success - Experten in open communiceren in seksualiteit en open communicatie - Marcom, HR 3. Avantages, disadvantages, pitfalls and barriers - Nieuwe: - bij onthaalmoment, onboarding bespreekbaar maken bij nieuwe collega’s - Bestaande: - nieuwsbrief: liefde bij de VUB: koppels over hun liefdesverhaal aan de VUB - Dis: gevaar normalisering van dit soort relties doordat het zichtbaar wordt, ‘meer’ ‘softe’ sociale contacten - Advantage: het bespreekbaar maken - Pitfall: bij beleid niet denken ‘het is opgelost’ - Barrier: het melden kan een barrier zijn: schaamte ook voor roddels 4. Next steps, milestones and action plan /
13
Report Atelier Prosperity Flip Chart Project Canvas 3 RED
YELLOW
- Be aware of transgression in inter personal relations -> own questionnaire - discuss results with/by an expert - advise on excutions
- Relationship with PhD student -> co-supervisor -> open discussion with the dean - possible ‘dangers’ - how to cope adequality -> lessen the taboo surrounding these relations -> less shame -> more people will come forward -> preventing “worst case scenario”
Own questionnaire discuss results -> preach/needs -> to clearly & transparent what transgression means (expert) - Evaluation of own child -> objectivity - parent takes step back - other person takes over If possible, parent excuses themselves from the board; if not possible extra board members for objectivity
- Rumours -> if rumours consist of - bullying - transgression -> conversatoin between both parties -> feel the responsibility to interfere if situation gets out of hand Yes – be aware of risks of conflict of interest. Know where to flag concerns + explore afterwards
14
Report Atelier Prosperity Attachments Project Canvas 3 What if a professor has a consensual intimate/sexual relationship with a PhD student and is their supervisor? - Co-supervisor (partner becomes more like an expert consultant) - Supervisors should notify university, if not: sanctions - Can’t due to dependency - Supervisor has to quote the student, he/she has to be objective - Dean/chairs should inquire when there is suspicion Should action be taken when there are rumours in a department about a colleague’s relationship with someone at work (whether it be extramarital or not)? - MELDPUNT -> actually do something - Both parties should be interrogated about the rumours and get the chance to clear things out -> depending on the situation, take action - Check: clear rules on relations between staff & students? - Define conflict of interest (check precedents) What if someone is on a evaluation of promotion board in which a child of their own is evaluated? - Parent can still be in the board , but has to leave when their own child is evaluated - Other students may not think the professor can stay objective (also: what if student has issues with different student) - Student in same field: - you need a different evaluator (or an additional one for objectivity) - as a student, I would worry about dumping my professor - Different fields: okay as long as A is not in a position of power (dean, rector,…) - Different universities: as long as their professional paths don’t cross, this is fine. Minimal consequences unless A is a very prominent figure in B’s field - PhD: - supervisor -> different supervisor or co-supervisor - not supervisor -> still close-knit (small groups) - Student can want revenge -> unfair (bad) assessment - Frustrations from class can be brought into heart & vice versa - Me too -> we too, mag niet gebruikt worden als marketing. We too communicatie was niet oké, legde alle verantwoordelijkheid bij iedereen behalve de dader - Make sure (and explicit) that there are consequences (on both sides: penalties for transgressor; loss of potential students & PhDs) - INVOLVE YOUR STUDENTS IN EVERY LEVEL/STEP OF THE PROCESS
15
Report Atelier Prosperity - <others can not speak freely if the parent is in the evaluation board TRUE - Children of staff should not be privileged, superiors should pay attention - Do exercises with the participants -> what would you do -> is this transgressive? - Leave/transfer notify, if not: sanctions
How can we successfully convince people within all layers of the VUB that everybody ought to be aware of the dynamics of interpersonal relations ant that transgressions can occur? Explicit - Tone from the top, put in open, discuss in all terms. Practice what you preach - Definitions? - Transparancy - Commit to constancy - Trust - Make training & awareness raising mandatory -> common values - Communicate to students that there’s new management at the meldpunt/ombudspersoon - CARE ABOUT YOUR STUDENTS, NOT YOUR IMAGE!
Social media usage and connections between students and teaching professors: guidelines to establish boundaries? - Case studies for discussion? No’one size fits all… - Profesoor =/= friend - We hesitate where public – private boundaries are blurred - Be consistent: if VUB uses social media, so will we. Guidelines in relationships generally not just social media - No flirty (or semi-…) messages, not even doubt - LinkedIn – fine, others: not in academic/only circumstances - Allow people to express preferences
16
Report Atelier Prosperity Project Canvas 4 1. Proposal of policy: name of the guideline, definition and context of the situation - Evaluate Personality of academic personal (Supervisors of PhD & Master) - Emotional skills - Social skills - ‘Joker’ for mentors -> many complaints -> investigation -> getting fired -> after 5 (Guidance) 2. Solutions and people to involve to have success - Psychologist (evaluation) - Rector (chance evaluation system) 3. Avantages, disadvantages, pitfalls and barriers This needs to be evaluated but board members could block the proposal. They have a lot to lose by firing a college that brings in money. 4. Next steps, milestones and action plan - Develop evaluation tool for emotional & social skills. - Should be approved - People should be made aware of this new system
17
Report Atelier Prosperity
Flip Chart Project Canvas 4 Urgent - Prof – PhD relation Acties: - melden aan M&O - Supervisor veranderen -> original supervisor can still serve in an advisory capacity
Long-term - Child Tot waar gaat de grens van betrokkenheid die aanleiding geeft tot verlaten van evaluatiecommissie Een cultuur van reflectie over eigen beoordelingsvermogen installeren -> onbevooroordeeld
- All layers - Rumours Test personality @ interview + MNO + personal competence check as a standard part of employee evaluation Inform students from the start Students + whole VUB-community updates + openness, not only promises -> people who are already interested come to … -> others not - Rumours Actie: bystander training, Great but need to create a cancel mentality. Create/refer to a common train
Is een buitenechtelijke relatie gog? Roddelcultuur is ook niet prettig op het werk -> work towards an open work culture where people don’t spread ungrounded gossip - All layers Try to “normalize” that tensions can and will arise. De realiteit… - training management staff - developing rules, sharing the rules, discuss the rules
18
Report Atelier Prosperity Attachments Project Canvas 4 What if someone is on a evaluation of promotion board in which a child of their own is evaluated? - Moet vastgelegd worden dat dat niet objectief (of zo objectief mogelijk) kan - Wat is rol van externen in het bewaken/beperken van machtsmisbruik? - Sowieso een bias, er is een emotionele band die objectieve evaluatie troubleert - Even if no biais, risk of perception biais -> manage this - Others will not speak freely when they have a professional relationship with the parent of the child How can we successfully convince people within all layers of the VUB that everybody ought to be aware of the dynamics of interpersonal relations ant that transgressions can occur? - Wegwerken van (self)victim-blaming - Niet te fel rekenen op het penaliserende als “afschrik”middel - Bagatelliseren van GOG wegwerken/counteren! - Nieuwe cultuur die “gekweekt” moet worden - Appelleren op ieders rol/bijdrage/verantwoordelijkheid in het voorkomen van & reageren op GOG - Have more ‘champions’ at all levels - In course clear! What if a professor has a consensual intimate/sexual relationship with a PhD student and is their supervisor? Issue: machtspositie PhD’s versus supervisor 1) Can there ever be free will + consent if hierarchy exists? What are VUB rules? 2) If allowed: conflict of interest: disclose + choze -> intimate relation or suspension 3) Is there a VUB check-in person? Should action be taken when there are rumours in a department about a colleague’s relationship with someone at work (whether it be extramarital or not)? - Does this create a conflict of interest at work that needs to be managed? - Be open where needed + get clarity. Speak direct with person involved - Protection for consequences of withdrawal of consent - Problem in withdrawal of consent without consequences -Tension: - whistleblower protection - vexations claims - Acties: actie nemen tegen diegene die “rumours” lanceert
19
Report Atelier Prosperity - Bevoegde persoon/orgaan waarmee je terecht kan met bepaalde bedenkingen -> door iedereen gekend
20