An NSF-funded initiative to develop a standardized job classification system for research administrators—addressing inconsistencies in job titles, responsibilities, and salaries across institutions. By gathering nationwide input through focus groups, surveys, and a workshop, we aim to reduce turnover, improve equity, and strengthen the research enterprise.
This National Science Foundation-funded GRANTED conference project brings together research administrators and institutional leaders from across the country to address the pressing need for a unified job classification system. Through virtual focus groups, an anonymous survey, and an in-person workshop, we gathered extensive data on the roles, responsibilities, needs, and challenges of research administrators. Our findings reveal that standardizing job titles, salary structures, and core competencies is vital for reducing turnover and allowing faculty to devote more time to research rather than administrative tasks.
Research administrators manage complex grant applications, compliance requirements, and fiscal oversight—yet their roles often lack consistent titles, compensation, and defined career paths. As a result, turnover rates remain high, particularly in under-resourced emerging and minority-serving institutions. Compounding these issues are expanding federal regulations and the shift to remote or hybrid work environments. Without sufficient administrative support, faculty face mounting administrative burdens, diminishing their ability to conduct cutting-edge research. Our conference project aimed to capture perspectives from a broad representation of institutions to develop practical, equitable solutions that ensure the long-term success of the research enterprise.
This one-year, three-phase conference project span from January 1 to December 31, 2024, and aimed to gather broad, nationwide insights into research administration needs. Phase 1 comprised five virtual focus groups—spanning the Midwest, South, Northeast, West, and a mixed-region session—to capture diverse perspectives on research infrastructure challenges. Fifty-three research administration leaders and human resource professionals participated, sharing candid views on workforce needs and gaps. Their anonymized input was then aggregated by Datagain, Inc. to inform Phase 2.
In Phase 2, the project team developed an anonymous 38-question survey, distributed nationally from June 17 to July 17, 2024, yielding 2,441 responses from a variety of institutions (R1, PUI, and R2). This robust dataset, publicly available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28607711.v1, paved the way for Phase 3—a half-day “Research Administrators Classification Action Workshop” during the 2024 SRAI Annual Meeting in Chicago. At the workshop, 26 research administrator leaders convened to review survey results, engage in Q&A, and brainstorm best practices and strategies for establishing a national job classification system. By integrating training sessions and networking opportunities from the broader SRAI Annual Meeting, the workshop offered participants immediate and long-term takeaways for strengthening research administration.
Between June 17 and July 17, 2024, we received 2,441 responses from research administrators across a variety of institution types—ranging from R1 universities with medical schools to predominantly undergraduate (PUI) and R2 institutions. On average, respondents had 14 years of experience in the field and worked at their current positions for approximately five years. Key findings revealed differences in resource allocation between Preaward and Postaward teams, inconsistent job titles and salaries, and challenges in recruiting high-quality candidates—especially among emerging and minority-serving institutions.
Inconsistent role definitions and a lack of standardized pay structures contributed to high turnover, with many research administrators citing better compensation, career advancement, and reduced workload as top reasons for seeking other positions. Regional and institutional variations were also evident, such as public and minority-serving institutions reporting greater recruitment difficulties. Together, these results underscore the urgent need for clear job descriptions, transparent career pathways, and consistent compensation models across institutions.
During the half-day “Research Administrators Classification Action Workshop,” participants reviewed the latest survey findings and engaged in focused discussions around these ten themes. Research administration leaders and decision-makers contributed practical ideas for standardizing job titles, establishing consistent salary structures, and creating clear career pathways. By fostering collaboration among a broad set of institutions—including R1, R2, and minority-serving colleges—the workshop generated actionable next steps toward a unified framework that supports research administrators nationwide.
Create consistent, clear role definitions across all institutions
Emphasize soft skills, regulatory knowledge, IT, and flexibility
Ensure fair, transparent compensation tied to expertise and duties
Balance specialized expertise with departmental needs
Encourage resource sharing, mentorship, and expertise exchange between institutions
Provide defined pathways, training, and mentorship for long-term growth
Leverage indirect cost recovery (IDC) to sustainably fund RA positions
Adjust salaries for cost of living while maintaining consistent role expectations
Create consistent, clear role definitions across all institutions
Develop unified titles, core competencies, and equitable pay scales
Our multi-phase project revealed a clear consensus among research administrators and institutional leaders: high turnover, inconsistent job titles, and variable compensation structures hinder the effectiveness of research administration across the United States. The data underscored that standardizing job classifications and aligning salary scales with responsibilities not only addresses these core issues but also elevates the overall research enterprise by reducing administrative burdens on faculty.
Equipped with these insights, our conference participants concluded that developing a national job classification system is the most impactful way to remedy the fragmentation currently plaguing the field. Aligning pay scales with duties, clarifying career pathways, and strengthening infrastructure—particularly at emerging and minority-serving institutions—will foster a more equitable, stable environment for research administrators. In turn, institutions can better attract and retain skilled professionals, ultimately supporting the faculty as they strive to grant success rates and drive innovation. We call on academic institutions, funding agencies, and professional organizations to champion this effort by forming cross-institutional working groups, piloting standardized roles, and investing in robust administrative frameworks that recognize the vital contributions of research administrators.
Credit: U.S. National Science Foundation
2-Apr-25
SRAI Professional Development Framework
We extend our deepest gratitude to the National Science Foundation for its generous support of this GRANTED conference project, as well as to the University of Pittsburgh and the Society of Research Administrators International teams who worked on this project. We also recognize the invaluable contributions of the research administrators, human resource professionals, and institutional leaders who volunteered their time and expertise in focus groups, the many survey respondents who shared their perspectives, and the workshop attendees whose insights shaped our final recommendations. Your commitment and collaboration were crucial to the success of this initiative to begin the process of standardizing the research administration workforce.
