external factors and pressures, internal coherence and sense-making remain dominant. What is less
easy to detect is how individuals respond to the perceptions of their peers and others who exert
influence upon them, and the ways, often subtle and almost undetectable, in which such inter-personal
influences impact upon or shape any shifts in identity. There is experiential and anecdotal evidence to
suggest that individuals react strongly when their academic identity is challenged or threatened. That
can include questions about their level of expertise, competence, or performance in particular duties or
functions or, occasionally, their suitability for the role or specific aspects of it.
Positive outcomes can also present challenges to identity. For example, individuals promoted
primarily on teaching or management criteria may struggle to accept that interpretation of their
identity and strengths, and continue to believe that their real strength is in research, especially if that is
the prized ability in their peer community. Thus, the complexities of academic identity present many
challenges to senior managers and human resource professionals. Often, the associated tensions are
relatively minor problems, but they can escalate into much more serious hurt or dispute, sometimes
leading to protracted and acrimonious formal disputes.
Development and support activity
Dunkin (2005), outlined six core elements of a human resource strategy that enable institutions to
address the challenges of competing for and retaining high quality, creative people in the increasingly
dynamic environment in which knowledge workers function. The core elements are:
• determining how many people are needed, what they need to do, how they need to do it, and
how to configure and manage them;
• analysing skills needed and addressing any shortfalls;
• attracting and retaining high quality staff;
• managing their performance;
• rewarding and acknowledging performance;
• developing staff.
There is a large literature on the development of academic staff (Kogan, Moses and El-Khawas,
1994; Webb, 1996; Ketteridge, Marshall and Fry, 2002; Blackwell and Blackmore, 2003; Eggins and
Macdonald, 2003; Kahn and Baume, 2003; Adams, 2005). Several, sometimes conflicting, messages
can be distilled from that output. Development provision is increasing and diversifying. Traditionally
the focus was on the initial preparation of academics for the key functions of research and teaching.
The former was seen as being addressed primarily through postgraduate training, and latter through
short programmes designed for graduate teaching assistants or new entrants to the academy. There
was, and continues to be, contestation over the definition of the professional expertise of academics,
and how it is acquired and developed.
Effective development strategies have to reconcile individual and organisational needs and
expectations. From the perspective of individual academics, prime concerns tend to be relevance,
timeliness, format and contextualisation. That echoes the findings of research by Becher (1999) into
attitudes to, and preferred approaches for, continuing professional development. Several trends
complicate the scene. The range of academic roles has expanded, segmented and fractionalised. There
has been significant growth in practice-oriented disciplines, which often need to recruit experienced,