To learn what PIs/MoRs felt they needed we held in-person focus groups and evaluated benchmarking data that we’d collected (see below).  

• Click here for an example of an email inviting PIs/MoRs to participate in a focus group. 

Visit Prosper’s resources on how to run a focus group. 

We used the themes that emerged from the focus groups and benchmarking survey to set some of the topics for the PI Network events. This work was overseen by the PI Steering Group, a collection of academics who provided also guidance and advice over what to cover in future events. 

• Click here for an example email invitation to be part of the Steering Group. 

Take the time to understand what development opportunities are offered within your organisation and what gaps there might be. These aren’t always obvious. For example, many higher education institutions offer PIs/MoRs some degree of management or leadership training. However, such training rarely covers how to support the specific needs of postdocs and especially their career development.  

PI Network events were scheduled approximately every 2 months, ensuring that July, August, December and early January were avoided as we found that this was when many of our target audience were unavailable. February to June and mid-September through to November saw more engagement. 

Whilst PIs/MoRs are always busy, this did not dictate event length – we didn’t purposefully create short events to increase the likelihood of our target audience registering and attending. Event length was determined by content, format and purpose, with events ranging from 1 hour to 3 hours (sessions over 1 hour included regular breaks to prevent fatigue).  

There is no single day or time when all PIs/MoRs are available at once, therefore we varied when the PI Network events were held to ensure that everyone should be able to attend a session regardless of their own schedule. To ensure sessions were accessible for the greatest number of people, events were scheduled between 10am and 4pm (for those who may have childcare or caring responsibilities) and on Tuesdays to Thursdays, as Fridays and (to a lesser extent) Mondays are common non-working days for people who work part time. 

To launch the PI Network and promote the first event we created a communications plan to ensure the widest possible audience was reached at the University of Liverpool. The communication strategy included emails, staff news articles, social media, inclusion in team briefings and local staff weekly news bulletin emails, and communications from Pro-Vice-Chancellor (PVC) for Research and Impact. 

• Click here for an example of our communications plan. 
• Click here for an example of our launch email. 
• Click here for an example of our launch staff news article. 

Communications for subsequent events followed a similar pattern but without the top-down approach from the PVC for Research and Impact. The main communications assets we used were the staff news article, promotional email and copy for inclusion in newsletters, bulletins and local staff updates.  

• Click here for an example staff news article to promote a PI Network event. 
• Click here for an example email to promote a PI Network event. 
• Click here for example copy for a newsletter/bulletin to promote a PI Network event. 

Registration for events was handled using the event management and ticketing website Eventbrite. We used custom questions during registration to get an idea of the Higher Education demographics of those registering: which institution they worked at, which broad disciplinary area their research was in, and what their job title was.  

• Click here for an example of an Eventbrite page for a PI Network event. 

Emails with joining instructions were sent to those registered for an event two days and two hours before the event started.  

The email sent two days before the event started also included a request to cancel their booking if they were no longer able to attend, so that others could join the session, and an invitation to complete a brief anonymous EDI monitoring form. The EDI form allowed us to monitor our progress against our goal of ensuring that Prosper engages with a representative range of stakeholders.  

• Click here for an example of a pre-event email. 
• Click here for an example of an EDI monitoring form. 

PI Network sessions were a mix of expert-led teaching or discussions and peer-to-peer audience discussions and best practice sharing. We found that a session that was purely expert-led resulted in participants feeling like they didn’t get a chance to hear from their peers or network, whilst a session that predominantly consisted of audience discussions led to feedback that asked for more information and directed learning.  

We worked with facilitators to include guided discussions so that sessions were around one third peer-to-peer sharing discussions, with two-thirds facilitator-led teaching. Prompt styles for discussions varied with facilitator, however we found that shorter, more focussed discussions with the facilitator keeping the discussion on topic to be the most effective approach. Some participants are always more vocal than others, and our approach was to allow them time but to also ensure that we provided opportunities for participants we’d not heard from to speak up or to write comments in the chat function if they’d prefer. 

Another way we included peer-to-peer learning in PI Network sessions was to invite 1-2 guest PI/MoR speakers for an event. The speaker would be well briefed in advance of the session so that they were aware of what was expected of them, and would talk from their experiences. 

• Click here for an example PI Network session briefing for a guest PI/MoR speaker. 

Since attendees could initially be from one of three higher education institutions across the North West of England, all PI Network events were held virtually using the platform Zoom. This provided that added advantage that we could record all or parts of the events to create video resources for those unable to attend the session, accessible via the Prosper portal. Where an event was being recorded, we paused the recording during discussions to ensure that discussion was not inhibited. We found that breakout rooms were sometimes viewed negatively, however feedback was more positive when the discussion prompts were more specific. We generally used breakout rooms in events where we had more than 15 participants for ease of discussion and to allow more people to actively participate. 

Not every participant will find that an event works for them. Some may provide negative feedback after or even during the session itself. In the very rare cases a participant was negative during an event, we listened to their complaints and tried to understand their issues, explained our own rationale, and presented them with facts and information to support our statements. If this didn’t resolve the issue then we let them know they were more than welcome to stay for the remainder of the event but that they were under no obligation to do so. A participant leaving an event early is preferable to them disrupting the rest of the event or negatively impacting the safe discussion space the event created.

Immediately following an event, those registered to attend were sent an email inviting them to complete a short evaluation form (see the ‘Evaluation’ section below).  

Every PI Network event was written up to create shared learnings pages on the Prosper portal (see here for examples). Each web page includes details about the event and facilitators and resources including whole event videos or video clips, slides from the event, written summaries of the different sections of the event, and downloadable workbooks and briefings. 

These materials allowed us to ensure that those who were unable to attend the event still could benefit from the event, by accessing materials from the event at a time convenient for them.