“Leadership Feedback Process” test run successfully completed

A further project initiated as part of rETHink is being successfully completed with the implementation of the “Leadership Feedback Process” (LFP), which is due to be rolled out at the start of next year. Workstream 3, which addressed the support of professors, drew up this process tailored to the academic environment on behalf of the Executive Board in order to facilitate personal, competency-based self-reflection for full professors in the area of leadership (cf. Internal news article of 13 December 2022).

LFP highlights personal development opportunities

The LFP has been tested and evaluated in a pilot phase in recent months under the leadership of the Consulting for Professors department. Twenty-nine professors spread across all departments agreed to take part in the test run. The feedback of the participants was generally positive. The professors find the new LFP to be a good instrument for highlighting where their individual development opportunities and blind spots in the area of leadership lie. The process is therefore being implemented from 2024 in its existing format with just minor adjustments.

For Julia Dannath, Vice President for Personnel Development and Leadership, this represents an important milestone: “I personally consider it very important that our scientists not only perform outstandingly in terms of research and teaching, but that they are also excellent leaders.” This applies in particular to professors: “Especially professors, who have an enormous influence on the development of their students and teams, need to be given the opportunity to develop their leadership profile on a continuous basis.”

Feedback discussion fosters examination of own role

The evaluation of the pilot test revealed that the participants particularly appreciated the one-to-one dialogue with the LFP partners. The Executive Board appointed nine persons at the start of the year to assume this role in the coming years. Those selected include emeriti, internal experts from Personnel Development and Leadership (VPPL), external coaches and also top executives from Swiss universities. The professors can choose which of these persons they wish to hold their LFP partner meeting with.

The core focus of the meeting comprises a verbal continuation of the self-reflection report that the professors draw up at the start of the LFP, as Antonio Togni, Emeritus Professor of Organometallic Chemistry and now an LFP partner, explains: “The feedback discussion serves neither as evaluation nor coaching. The idea is to give professors food for thought with regard to their role as “academic leaders” so that they can continuously develop further.” For this to succeed, a high degree of openness and transparency is required from the professors and the provision of a trustworthy, non-judgmental framework by the LFP partners.

Valuable input on an equal footing

The peer character of the feedback discussion is equally important, adds Annette Oxenius, Professor of Immunology, who took part in the LFT pilot test: “I found it very enriching to be able to talk to somebody who is familiar with my situation and at the same time offers an outsider’s perspective.” She said she had never before had this opportunity in this form and depth in her academic career: “The meeting with my LFP partner enabled me to obtain some general feedback on my leadership role for the first time in my 21 years at ETH. I took away a lot of valuable input for myself and my group.”

Annette Oxenius’s only criticism of the LFP concerns the anonymous survey carried out in the run-up to the feedback discussion among the research groups of the participating professors. “It’s a pity that you only receive the average score for each question. I would have liked to receive more content-based feedback.” She therefore deliberately sought dialogue with her group in order to obtain more information. According to the evaluation of the pilot test, other LFP participants would also welcome detailed feedback from their group and the Consulting for Professors department is therefore to consider integrating a free text field for the anonymous survey.

LFP as part of lifelong learning

The evaluation revealed further optimisation potential in the final reports: the content addressed in the feedback discussion between the professor and the LFP partner remains confidential. It is merely necessary to confirm to VPPL that the discussion has taken place. However, a conclusion can optionally be added in the final report that sums up the key findings from this reflection process. According to Julia Dannath, only partial use has been made of this option so far: “I would like three personal insights to be noted in future in the final report that the professors take away with them. Writing the targets down will make it easier to focus on them, although they should then be addressed independently and not monitored or checked by us.”  

In addition, the reports provide VPPL with important feedback on the general leadership challenges of professors at ETH. For example, it became apparent at the first annual meeting of LFP partners on 20 November 2023 that the switch to department management that was about to or had already taken place posed a special challenge for some pilot participants. Cultivating a constructive feedback culture in the team and the development of a strategy for the research group are also areas in which professors would like to receive support.

This feedback will serve as a basis enabling VPPL to adjust its offering in a more targeted manner or develop new formats. For Julia Dannath the LFP is a win-win situation: “The LFP not only contributes to lifelong learning with regard to the personal development of the participating professors. It also helps the institution to grow and to recognise its responsibility to support its professors and assist them in their role as academic leaders.”