Ever since the publication of the results of the psychological workplace assessment in February 2013, working environment committees and groups as well as liaison committees at both departmental and faculty level have been analysing these results and discussing potential steps and solutions. A plan of action for the entire Faculty of Arts has just been adopted by the faculty’s working environment committee and liaison committee.

A bottom-up process

Mette Thunø, Dean of the Faculty of Arts, is delighted with the constructive atmosphere and fruitful dialogue of the faculty committee meetings that were held to follow up on the assessment results. The aim of the plan of action is to improve the psychological working environment at all levels of the organisation, which is why working environment groups and liaison committees at the faculty’s departments and centres have also played an important role.

“The faculty management felt that it was important for the discussions to start at grassroots level. This is where our staff experience challenges on an everyday basis. So the action we are now taking is the result of a bottom-up process. And judging by all the constructive contributions we have received from all corners of the organisation, this was the right approach to take,” she says.

The faculty’s plan of action is based on five local plans of action (for the Department of Aesthetics and Communication, the Department of Education, the Department of Culture and Society, the Centre for Teaching Development and Digital Media, and the Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation respectively). And these local plans of action have been inserted into the same document as the faculty’s plan of action to make it easy for everyone to see who is responsible for taking specific initiatives, and who will be following up on the steps that are taken.

Everyone is responsible

The measures outlined in the plan of action have been categorised according to the “IGLO” model used by the Human Resources division. The “I” stands for “Individual”, focusing on the steps which individual members of staff are responsible for taking. Responsibility for taking action is also allocated to “G” (Group), “L” (Leadership or Management) and “O” (Organisation).

“This will enable us to cover all the bases, and everyone will be required to take responsibility for our joint working environment. The management and organisation will do what we can, but individuals and groups also have a role to play,” says Thunø.

The management have just submitted a proposal for an adjustment in departmental structure for discussion by the departments. Negotiations are also being conducted regarding new, joint standards for working hours, which are expected to be finalised by the end of the year. And workshops focusing on how to handle stress will also be available soon.

Among other things, staff at departments and centres are encouraged to play an active role in resolving conflicts and announcing their office hours clearly – as well as helping to create a culture of appreciation and to develop the competences in AU’s administrative systems.

A dynamic process

The intention is that the plans of action should be adjusted and updated on an ongoing basis by the working environment committees and liaison committees. The faculty liaison committee and working environment committee will also meet once every six months to discuss the progress of the plan.

“The assessment was conducted in November 2012, so some issues are no longer relevant. Conditions will undoubtedly continue to change over time, so I regard the plan of action as a dynamic document that will take us up to the next assessment process,” says Mette Thunø.

You can find the plans of action and read more about the follow-up process at the Arts APV assessment site