What it is like to work at UMPRUM

Survey results 2025–2026

 

At the turn of 2025/2026, UMPRUM conducted a survey focused on working conditions, evaluation and culture. We are good at international mobility, equal opportunities and ethics. We are particularly troubled by a lack of quality feedback, a high bureaucratic burden and internal communication. Each group of staff perceives the problems differently. 

139 employees took part in the survey (a 57.4% response rate).  
Approximately half of academic staff (50.4%) and half of non-academic staff (49.6%) responded. This means that the survey reflects the situation at the school fairly well. 

Note on the data:  

The categorisation of researchers (R1–R4) is based on the European Commission's definition. 

R1 – Doctoral students and first stage researchers 
R2 – Recognised researchers 
R3 – Studio heads and associate professors 
R4 – Professors 

Participation of first stage researchers (R1) was low, so this group is combined with R2 in the analysis and will be a priority in the next phase of the project. 
Groups R3 and R4 are assessed together in the analysis. 
Technical and administrative staff (THP) are divided in the analysis into workshops and other administrative staff (administrative workers). 

The survey combined closed questions, scale-based ratings (a Likert scale of 1–4) and open answers, which supplemented the results with specific suggestions from staff. 

 

 

  

Key findings 

The results show strong foundations, but also a need for systemic changes. 

🟢 Strengths

Ratings above 3.4 out of 4 

International mobility (3.7): Support for overseas trips is the best-rated area. The main barrier is not funding, but a lack of time.

Equal opportunities (3.6) and ethics (3.4): UMPRUM is perceived as a fair and ethical working environment regardless of age, gender or origin. Staff know where to turn in the event of ethical problems, and they rate the role of the school's ombudsperson positively.

Workshops as a stable environment: The workshops are the most stable working environment at the school in terms of both relationships and operation. 

🔴 Areas for improvement

Ratings below 3.0 out of 4

Career growth among administrative staff (2.5): The career system for administrative workers (administrative staff) is perceived as non-transparent and career progression as practically impossible, because it runs into the barrier of a flat organisational structure. 

Feedback (2.7): Across the school there is a lack of systematic, quality feedback from superiors. At the same time, there is evident concern about overly formal ("box-ticking") evaluation.

Working facilities for senior academics (2.8): Senior academics lack adequate working conditions, in particular shared offices for undisturbed work and consultations. 

Themes from the comments

Work overload and organisation of work: Tension linked to the administrative burden persists between academics and administrative staff. Administrative staff face a high level of overload and inadequate cover arrangements, and point to an undervalued perception of their role. Academics perceive bureaucracy and a lack of cooperation as an obstacle to effective work.

Pressure from students: Staff point to the need for clearly set boundaries and cultivated communication. There is an emphasis on protecting not only the "safe space" of students, but also of teachers and workshop staff.

Internal communication: Staff feel a lack of transparency in decision-making and feel disconnected from management in terms of information. Mass email communication is perceived as confusing. 

How individual groups of staff experience the situation 

A more detailed look at the data shows that the conclusions differ significantly between individual groups: 

Doctoral students and assistants (researchers R1+R2) 

(doctoral students, assistants, senior assistants) 

  • weak support on entry (onboarding) 

  • doctoral students lack systematic involvement in teaching and research 

  • feedback works mostly formally (questionnaires), there is a lack of ongoing guidance 

  • low cover arrangements in teaching limit the possibility of taking creative leave 

  • linking assistant positions to studio management results in lower job stability  

Senior academics (R3+R4) 

(associate professors, professors, heads of studios and departments) 

  • they run into inadequate working facilities (there is a lack of shared offices and space for teamwork and consultations)    

  • they strongly perceive the administrative burden (especially with grants), which is not perceived as effective support for their work 

  • they reject overly formalised "box-ticking" evaluation, which does not correspond to the nature of artistic and academic work 

Support structure (administrative staff) 

(administration, management, workshops) 

Administration 

  • faces long-term work overload, unclear competences and low cover arrangements 

  • perceives limited opportunities for career growth 

  • points to shortcomings in internal communication and limited availability of information 

Workshops 

  • they are the most stable and relationally safe working environment 

  • they point to the need for respect for rules, boundaries and cultivated communication, particularly on the part of students and academics 

The survey results, together with other materials, will serve the Working Group as a basis for preparing specific measures within the HR Award project. 

What it is like to work at UMPRUM