During the Recognition & Rewards Festival there will be three rounds of workshops. In the table below you will find an overview of the workshops. In the register form you can select the workshops you would like to join. You are welcome to join any workshop, however to ensure that the choice of workshops fits you well, we classified it into several levels:

General
No specific prior knowledge is required to participate in these sessions. However, it is helpful to attend the pre-program information session and read the position paper Room for Everyone’s Talent.

Intermediate
These sessions require some prior knowledge and are aimed at those directly or indirectly involved in Recognition & Rewards initiatives: members of the committees at the institutions, policy makers, members of the Executive Boards and other administrators, international counterparts, and academics in general.

Advanced
These sessions are small-scale and interactive and are aimed at those involved in shaping Recognition & Rewards, e.g. members of the steering committee, project leaders, and chairs of the committees at the institutions. The goal of these sessions is to actively engage and exchange good practices and experiences.

*Some speakers might be added to the workshops since we are waiting for confirmation.

TimeTitleIntroduction
11.30 - 12.30hFollowing Teams: teamwork in Twente

With Tanya Bondarouk

(Advanced)
Given the emphasis on talent development within the UT and the shifting importance of considering talent beyond an individual’s contribution, the R&R team has initiated a qualitative research into talenting in teams. During this session we will discuss results of a one-year research project that focused on team functioning and recognition of teams and individuals, in the context of the UT. We addressed two questions:
- What specific practices enable good functioning of teams at UT?
- How can team effort be recognised?
The findings suggest that the presence of a clear, common team mission, and ‘information sharing’, ‘offering additional details’, ‘clear language arrangements’, and ‘open discussion’, - made a fundament of good functioning teams. Combined with the knowledge from literature, we discuss different ways to recognise individuals and teams in the team talenting effort.
11.30 - 12.30hTeam Spirit & high involvement

With Paul Boselie & Stans de Haas

(Advanced)
In this session short pitches of Utrecht University recognition and rewards work group members will be presented to demonstrate their experiences with high involvement in the transformation. The short pitches focus on a specific recognition and rewards theme or intervention and the role of the presenter.
1.The development of leadership training from an HRM perspective.
2. The development of the UU template education and/or research from a scholar perspective.
3. Focus on Team Spirit through a fellow of the Faculty Open Science Team (FOST) in the implementation of recognition and rewards in the UU faculties.
There will be plenty of room for interaction, discussion and exchanging experiences.
11.30 - 12.30hFocus profiles and working in teams at the Erasmus School of Social and
Behavorial Sciences

With Victor Bekkers, Christien Bakker & Bianca Langhout

(Advanced)
The Erasmus School of Social and Behavorial Sciences (ESSB) developed focus profiles
(impact profile, education profile, research profile and management/leadership profile). The
pilot has been running for about a year now and the next step is to implement ‘team
science’ (working in and assessing teams). This workshop will elaborate on the different
steps that were taken at ESSB.
11.30 - 12.30hEmergent leadership and team spirit: Applying Science in Practice

With Jaap Paauwe & Ramona van der Linden

(Advanced)
In this workshop we focus on emergent leadership and team spirit. Team spirit as an enabler for team teaching and team science. As teams become increasingly self-managing (especially in an academic setting) it is important that people feel responsible for their team and take the lead in close collaboration with others (distributed leadership). This implies that participants need to be stimulated in two ways. First, to strengthen their capabilities and practicing in emergent (informal) leadership, without being appointed in a formal leadership position as such. Secondly, to be aware of what team spirit implies and to be stimulated in the kind of attitude and behaviours, which are characteristic for team spirit. Science has provided us with many concepts which all relate to different aspects of (emergent) leadership and team spirit. And not only concepts but also validated items for the kind of behaviours, which are typical for emergent leadership and team spirit.
Applying these insights to practice is what this workshop is all about.
11.30 - 12.30hTeams & team performance; good practices outside academia

With Anita Klaver, Mostafa Ben Amar & Philippe de Bock

(Intermediate)
In this workshop Anita Klaver en Mostafa Ben Amar will share their experiences with team effectiveness and team performance at Enreach (a software company providing cloud communication solutions throughout Europe), Philips and Boeing. There will be ample room for questions and discussion about what we in academia can learn from the experiences in the corporate world.
11.30 - 12.30hRewarding Open Science, Team Science and Collaborative Approaches

With Maria Cruz, Hans de Jonge, Serkan Girgin, Joachim Goedhart, Connie Clare & Sanli Faez

(General)
NWO introduced the Open Science Fund as a funding instrument designed to reward and incentivise researchers who practice open science. Many of the awarded projects in the 2020/2021 round rely on a collaborative approach that leverages the strengths and expertise of professionals trained in different fields and disciplines – in other words, a team science approach. The quality and strength of the team was part of the grant assessment criteria, as was the open science track record of the main applicant. In this session, we will discuss how research funders can reward and incentivise open science and team science through funding instruments such as the Open Science Fund. Taking some of the awarded projects as examples, we will look at best practices for team work and collaboration and discuss how to reward and recognise such practices.
12.30 - 13.15hLunch break
13.15 - 14.15hDialogue on international reputation and international career prospects

With Ineke Sluiter, Raymond Poot, Jeroen Geurts, Hanneke Hulst & Marcel Levi

(General)
Roundtable from the studio of the Recognition & Rewards Festival. During this round table, the participants explore their experiences, views, dreams, concerns and possibilities. Two themes are central to this dialogue: “International career prospects” and “International reputation”. Ineke Sluiter (KNAW president and member of the Recognition & Rewards steering group) will moderate this dialogue. The participants in this dialogue reflect together on their underlying assumptions and values.
13.15 - 14.15hHow do university rankings relate to Recognition & Rewards?

With Pieter Duisenberg, Tessa Groen, Reyer Gerlagh & Rolf Hut

(Intermediate)
The rationale for rankings participation in Dutch academia largely derives from the search for resources through building a strong international reputation and the recruitment of international students. However, a ranking gives an incomplete picture of reality. The strength of higher education institutions is, par excellence, their mutual diversity. The pitfall of rankings is that they paint a global picture in which (too) little justice is done to the complexity of what is measured. No ranking is completely objective. We see that the indicators rankings use mostly focus on research performance. While with our Recognition & Rewards programme we strive for excellence in all of the key areas such as education, impact, leadership and (for university medical centres) patient care. Nevertheless, an external benchmark can be a valuable tool. And international rankings are of great importance in several disciplines. In this workshop we investigate how rankings relate to the Recognition & Rewards programme.
13.15 - 14.15hEarly career academics with a focus on PhD's

With Inez Koopman, Annemijn Algra & Sarah Thin

(Intermediate)
A PhD student has a specific assignment: do research and write a dissertation as a proof of competence. The day-to-day supervisor/promoter has to ensure that PhD candidates will obtain their PhD in time while doing research of good quality. So in the short term the PhD candidate should not be distracted too much from the primary task: doing good research. PhD students often get the message along the way: research will help you make career in science. Research matters, the rest is noise.
After their dissertation, 75% of PhD students will not continue in science at all. As a good employer, universities have an obligation to listen to their ambitions and offer broad talent development, while at the same time being aware not to push them into the idea of becoming a '5-legged sheep'.
In this workshop we will explore the question: what does Recognition & Rewards mean for the organization of the PhD trajectory? Three PhD's from Maastricht University and Utrecht University, will share their (bottom-up) developed vision on the PhD trajectory and a competence model.
13.15 - 14.15hEvidence and the narrative

With Dirk-Jan den Boer, Vitória Piai, Kasper Gossink-Melenhorst & Marie-José van Tol.

(Intermediate)
Much has happened since 2019, when NWO signed both DORA and the position paper “Room for Everyone’s Talent”. Among other things NWO introduced the use of a narrative CV in her Talent program, improved reviewer instructions, piloted the Open Science Fund, and is exploring ways to help researchers gain more impact with their research. All these efforts are aimed at providing chances for diverse talents and making room for different career paths and research activities. NWO aims to foster a healthier and more sustainable research culture. During this session we give a broad overview of NWO’s recognition and rewards efforts, and then turn our focus on the narrative cv. What is the basis for this policy? What are the dilemmas involved? What are the experiences with the narrative cv in committees? Two years after its introduction, we reflect on the rationale behind it, share our experiences, the challenges we’ve faced and invite the audience to explore with us how we can further improve. While the term ‘narrative cv’ evokes association of storytelling and maybe even fiction, the CV is aimed at substantiation, context and evidence. What we call the CV might need to be improved.
13.15 - 14.15hAssessment of quality: how to proceed?

With Frank van Vree & Perry den Brok

(Advanced)
There is already ample experience with respect to quality assessments in research. Various qualitative and quantitative supporting evidence for research assessments has been developed and is used during peer review of both academic staff as well as research programmes. However, the way that part of this evidence has been used (mainly quantitative evidence such as the Journal Impact Factor) is not considered in line with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Furthermore the evidence is considered one-sided. The revised Strategy Evaluation Protocol (SEP) already puts more emphasis on assessing societal relevance of research as well as team performance in relation to the strategy of the department involved. In the context of Recognition & Rewards it is important to develop an assessment framework that also includes criteria for assessing quality of education, impact, leadership and team performance.
In this workshop we share experiences and good practices, focusing on education and the first experiences with the revised SEP. This is a workshop that collects ideas to further answer the question:
Assessment of quality: how to proceed?
Break
14.30 - 15.30hSustainable Careers in Academia

With Jos Akkermans & Beatrice van der Heijden

(General)
At its core, the “Rewards and Recognition” debate is about how we can change current systems and practices to enable people working in academia to thrive in their work and career. Consequently, to a significant degree, the discussion is about academics’ career development. Many people may not realize this, but a scientific field of inquiry focuses specifically on these topics. Wouldn’t it make sense to use that scientific knowledge in our discussions about recognizing and rewarding academics? We believe it does, and in this workshop, we want to share some of that knowledge.
14.30 - 15.30hmmmAcademia: a card game to stimulate reflection about Recognition & Rewards in academia

With Frank Leoné & Liesbeth Gulpers

(General)
On the one hand, Recognition & Rewards (R&R) can only succeed if there is a widely shared believe that change is both needed and possible, requiring extensive discussions. On the other hand, many topics are really sensitive, as it can impact individual careers and reputations. The potential result is that initiatives are mostly discussed behind closed doors or with self-selected participants and the really sensitive topics are avoided. To remedy this, we designed a reflective card game called “mmmAcademia”. In this game, players read aloud realistic events from academia, touching upon sensitive topics. Next, they share their personal experience with the topic and discuss what they feel the department or university should do with this topic and how urgent this is. By making the hard topics explicit and creating a game space in which they can be discussed, either in organized settings or at the coffee table, we hope the game will stimulate discussion throughout the organization. At the festival, we will play the game together, or a digital version thereof, based on the sixteen cards for Education that are currently being finalized. The full game will most likely be provided under open licensing for other universities to use.
14.30 - 15.30hImplementation of diverse career paths at the UMC's.

With Marian Joels, Nicolien Wieringa, Rinze Benedictus, Elizabeth Koier & Dagmar Eleveld-Trancikova.

(General)
In University Medical Centers there are four core tasks: care, education, research and knowledge utilization. In recent years several umc's have developed differentiated career paths for academic personnel. In the context of the Recognition and Rewards programme, several umc's share their experiences with differentiation in career paths and how they are implemented. What does work well, what may still be improved and which choices have been made in the process? There are considerable differences between umc's in the choices that were made. In this workshop we will interactively discuss ideas and choices behind the career paths that were developed in three umc's: UMC Groningen, UMC Utrecht and Radboudumc. The first evaluations of some of them in practice will feed the discussions.
14.30 - 15.30hHarnessing community resources for research assessment reform

With Sarah de Rijcke & Alex Rushforth

(Intermediate)
This session will set out fictionalized examples of challenges that appear when introducing new assessment practices in Dutch universities and invite the audience to share their experiences and thoughts, promote shared learning, and where possible, offer tentative solutions and ways ahead.
14.30 - 15.30hSharing good practices about programmatic change approach

With Ena Voûte, Franke van der Molen, Paula Fikkert & Ingrid Vos

(Intermediate)
In this session two universities (TU Delft and Radboud University) will elaborate on their change approach. In a discussion format experiences will be shared and participants will be able to share their thoughts and questions.
Committee chairmen of both universities present their approaches, experiences and look forward to the next steps.

14.30 - 15.30hDialogues on Recognition & Rewards

With Aukje Nauta, Helen Pluut, Manon van der Heijden & Sietse Rauwersink

(General)
In the change approach of Recognition & Rewards at Leiden University, having dialogues is seen as a core value. That is why in this session we elaborate on the ‘why, how & what’ of dialogues and exchange experiences.