1. Dr Sue Hornibrook Kent Business School 20 th November 2012

2.  an effective system “allocates workload equitably to the participants in a transparent manner such that staff behaviour is aligned with departmental strategic goals” ( Burgess et al, 2003:230 )  A continuum of approaches ranging from informal approach to a comprehensive/complex approach (Barrett & Barrett 2007, 2010; Vardi 2009)  Human Resource Management orientation - a ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ approach

3.  What is the impact upon individual academic attitudes, behaviour and achievement of institutional goals?  An Organisational Justice (Fairness) Perspective ◦ Distributive Justice ◦ Procedural Justice ◦ Interactional Justice (Interpersonal and informational)  Perceptions of justice (injustice) impact on Organisational outcomes – positive (negative)

4.  Background: A Business School  The Model – comprehensive/complex points based approach  Consultation (35 responses)  Benefits of the Model: academic staff identified need for effective management and transparency in planning individual workloads (Vardi 2009; Barrett and Barrett 2007; Houston et al 2006)

5.  Disadvantages of the Model: ◦ Measurability – inputs or outputs? ◦ Negative impact on collegiality ◦ Manipulation? ◦ Accuracy and transparency ◦ Stick or carrot?  Workload Allocation Models not only add to the administrative burden but can also impact on perceptions of unfairness.  Resistance, negative retaliatory behaviours and withdrawal of discretionary behaviours