All members of academia can initiate change.

Providing and promoting career counseling, coaching, and support services to all employees can help reduce pressures within a research environment, which is critical to everyone's well-being.

Teams can openly discuss, modify, and expand existing guidelines to develop consensus on their collective and individual behaviors and attitudes. Based on this, a group standard or pledge can be developed to ensure that all team members know what is expected in the research or teaching environment. This helps foster a positive culture by refining standards and norms.

Encourage researchers and support staff to find time and space to meet to share ideas and experiences. By involving other departments, institutions and sectors, discussions can focus on improving research integrity and culture, to share best practice on what has worked, what hasn’t and its impact.

Career progression is a key factor in retention and enhances not only the quality of research for the institution, but for the research community as a whole. Researchers can feel more valued if skills needs are reviewed individually and as a group, ensuring they all possess the necessary skills for their role, such as statistics, data-handling, proposal-writing and resource management. And following on from this, identifying gaps and offering courses for development.

Highlight the importance of research culture and engage all staff across the organization by hosting a research culture and integrity day. Presentations, workshops and panel discussions could be given from across the organization. Different departments could showcase the ways they have improved research culture and integrity, as well as addressing areas where there is still room for improvement.

Leading open discussions can help create a more collaborative environment by allowing team members to share not only their successes, but also their "failures." This helps build respect and trust within the research team by being open about it and providing support when things don't always go smoothly.

A code of conduct can regulate behavior in the team. Such a code can be established in the organizational unit to hold individuals accountable and empower them. Teams and institutes can openly discuss, amend, and build on existing guidelines to develop consensus on their collective and individual behaviors and attitudes. Based on this, a group standard or pledge could be developed to ensure that all team members know what is expected in the research environment. This helps foster a positive culture by refining standards and "norms."

Attend trainings in the topics of bias, scientific culture, leadership, diversity: Especially managers, but also as teams. Periodically take advantage of offers and talk about them. The acquisition of professional and interdisciplinary competencies is made possible through appropriate offers, regardless of whether a career in the academic sector or outside of it is being pursued. Career paths leading out of academia are equally worthy of recognition, and scientific qualification is also valuable outside the academic sector, where the majority of doctoral graduates continue their careers.

Who can have a say? Who is informed about decisions in advance? Involving a broad number of people at different levels in decisions and discussions enables informed debate and empowers students and mid-level faculty members in particular to take responsibility.

In hiring committees, a sense of accountability can be fostered among committee members for research evaluation and proposal submissions. This can help lead to fairer and better evaluation processes.

In hiring committees, value should be placed on fairness and transparency in research evaluation. Members of appointment committees should be aware of their bias and have opportunities to counteract it. For example, one member of the committee can be appointed as dedicated observers with the single task of monitoring other members for unconscious bias. For example, the observer can time how long they give to discussing each candidate and count the number of negative and positive comments.

Contributions from researchers can be considered as a whole or as a portfolio. Cluster appointments can help institutions think about hiring in terms of their larger academic portfolio. They are also a proven strategy for increasing diversity.

Research evaluation processes can be improved through iterative feeback. Set short- and long-term goals for new policies and practices to measure success. No process is perfect; there must be the opportunity to revise and refine policies and practices as needed.

A support fund can provide uncomplicated and rapid support with money from an institute. Such funds can be used to provide the necessary financial security, stability and continuity for employees in critical situations, during restructuring, changes in teams or other situations.

Appreciative supervision of undergraduate and graduate students means being available and taking time. In particular, the following points are important:

• Hold structured meetings with clear requirements/meeting content
• Limit micromanaging
• Require respectful working hours
• Show interest in student work, ask for it on your own, read student papers or excerpts
• Be up to date on research/lab work
• Discuss with each other among supervisors
• Communicate clear requirements as well as criticism early on
• Strike a good balance between support and freedom
• Invite discussion and questions
• Show understanding for personal and family situation

In the doctoral agreement, the framework conditions of the doctorate are defined with regard to the optimal support of the doctoral students. This includes, among other things, the form and duration of the doctorate, training, research and supervision goals. Furthermore, the doctoral agreement defines the targeted scientific achievements, e.g. written contributions or congress contributions. The educational and research goals of the doctoral student are formulated for a certain period of time (e.g. one year) and periodically discussed and adjusted. A second supervisor from outside the institute is often provided for and makes sense in order to be able to offer a point of contact, especially in cases of conflict.

Funding awards for good research culture, excellent teaching and outstanding research can recognize the efforts of teams and individuals and draw attention to their successes. They can thus be made visible as role models and best practices.

In the team, in the institute, taking time for internal training on topics that are important and interesting. Input from outside the team or contributions from outside the field can provide stimulating food for thought and give participants the opportunity to address the topic in their work environment, their team or their institute.

A good error culture promotes trust in the team and one's own abilities as well as creative research and open learning. A good error culture, where errors are openly discussed, is the foundation for diverse teams and team learning.

Normalizing mistakes means creating a trusting culture where mistakes are part of the learning process, where risk-taking is reinforced, and where mistakes can be talked about without fear.

It's important to plan for mistakes. Mistakes can happen anywhere. By being attentive and anticipating mistakes, you can respond faster and better without provoking unproductive blame. Last but not least, much can be learned from mistakes: Analyze mistakes and implement the findings.

By advocating careful, qualitative publications, you contribute to a research culture that values quality over quantity.

• Refuse to engage in so-called salami-slicing; the distribution of your results across as many publications as possible.
• Refuse to co-author papers that you have not been actively involved in writing.
• Demand and encourage publication deadlines that give you enough time to write qualitatively well
• Publish more works as a collective and establish team or institute rules for doing so
• Cite a diverse group (academic age, ethnicity, gender) and contribute to the visibility of marginalized scholars.

Establish regular roundtable discussions to exchange ideas about problems and possible solutions. Exchange ideas, hold regular exchange cafés to share best practices.

Communicate negative results to encourage others: Create an "alternative" resume of your failures. Log unsuccessful applications, rejected publications, and proposals. Such a list can show others that failure is a central part of living research.

Forward media inquiries to the person with the appropriate expertise, rather than abusing them for your personal visibility. Educate yourself about the medium and support independent editorial staff. Be especially supportive of minority representation in your field.

The promotion of early career researchers starts at the student level. By advertising assistantships transparently, you give students the opportunity to seriously consider the idea of pursuing academic work. A transparent advertisement promotes inclusion and diversity, which might not be achieved with a non-transparent selection. A clear task profile for student assistants helps ensure that they can best benefit from their tasks and experience a fair workload.

Learning organizations are better able to respond to the unexpected and are more responsive to their employees. A questionnaire can be used to determine whether your organizational unit (institute, faculty, ...) corresponds to a "learning organization". Three main factors are essential for organizational learning and adaptability: a supportive learning environment, concrete learning processes and practices, and leadership that provides empowerment.

Help destigmatize leaving the university. Offer your employees an exit interview. Use the opportunity to critically reflect on your team and your institution.

Doctoral students and early career researchers should be encouraged to develop their skills even if they are not directly related to their field. Only a fraction of PhD students will later hold a professorship; developing skills for careers outside academia thus contributes to destigmatizing leaving academia.

In many areas of higher education, there is a tendency to work beyond contractual hours and to be available even on evenings and weekends. This can be a freedom, but it can also lead to overwork and stress. How to counteract the overtime culture:

• Leaders act as role models
• Set limits and communicate them (for example, with a note in the email signature).
• Discuss working hours within the team and with superiors.
• As a supervisor, monitor the working hours of your team members.
• Compensate overtime wherever possible
• Make it clear that more work does not necessarily mean better work
• Counteract the pressure to work longer hours than your team members

Research and teaching go together. See yourself as a learner in all contexts. Try to adopt the perspectives of your students and accept criticism. Combine knowledge building with research in internships and seminars. Support the development of critical and inquisitive attitudes among students and team members. Maintain an intellectual claim on students by explaining their duties and responsibilities in relation to their personal work; by explaining the goals and requirements of the courses; by discussing with them the purpose and rationale for organizing the content; by asking for and considering their feedback on the lessons taught. Take opportunities to educate themselves.

A clear division of tasks helps to ensure that all team members can perform their duties carefully and manage their workload responsibly. Job specifications provide structure and promote a clear division of tasks. In particular, they enable students, interns and student assistants to assume responsibility for clearly assigned areas of responsibility.

A mission statement for teaching can point out clear maxims for action, for example in the areas of the content, goals and design of courses, performance records, students/participants, teachers, organization and evaluation. With a mission statement for teaching, you strengthen the teaching culture and contribute to the fact that teachers and students have a common starting point for the organization of teaching.

A good feedback culture contributes to the psychological safety of employees and strengthens a positive error culture.

The following are essential elements of a good feedback culture:

• Supervisors and faculty serve as role models in how to solicit, receive, and use feedback.
• Everyone receives feedback (i.e., it is not voluntary).
• Feedback is embedded in a trusting relationship.
• The emphasis is on support rather than blame.
• Feedback is given in the context of a trusting relationship.
• Feedback is given to promote professional progress.
• The recipient is clear about what the feedback means for her*his future development and the opportunities for change that are stimulated by the feedback.

Ways to operationalize a feedback culture:

• Those who give feedback routinely use direct observation as a source for it.
• Time is provided to review, clarify, and reflect on feedback.
• Employees are rewarded in ways that recognize their commitment to a feedback culture.
• Informal feedback or feedback "of the moment" is encouraged.
• Reflection and informed self-assessment are encouraged.
• Willingness to provide feedback is encouraged.
• Learners are explicitly taught how to give useful feedback.
• Teachers are explicitly taught how to provide useful feedback.
• Regular bidirectional feedback conversations are encouraged.
• Learners are trained to respond to both reinforcing and constructive feedback, including learning to recognize and manage the emotions associated with receiving feedback.

Take discrimination seriously and address it as such. Be aware of the needs of your employees and colleagues.

Find out about the services offered by counseling centers and make use of their support.

Create protected spaces for affected persons in which they feel safe, trusted and recognized. Choose anti-discriminatory language and share information about it.

Making visible efforts made and measures implemented to improve research culture, evaluation, and leadership quality is important to gain support and function as a role model. Do good and talk about it!

Giving good advice can be difficult. Think about where you can give good advice.

• Decide what you are good at and focus on offering advice or help in those areas. Be willing to say that you are not the best person to ask about X, and suggest another person who may be better on that topic.
• There are two types of help you can offer people: Help that is directly related to the progress of their career and help that is psychologically tinged and supportive. Think ahead about which type of help you want to use your skills for.
• Decide how much time you are willing to invest.- Be willing to look at things from the point of view of the person you are talking to, even if that is not your point of view or approach. Think about what seems possible for that person, given what they have told you about themselves.

Initiating change in a team where dependencies and power imbalances exist can be difficult and perceived as a gamble by team members. However, even team members without a leadership role can effect change.

• Try things out in areas where you feel comfortable and have some influence
• Share ideas with your community
• Actively participate in committees and surveys
• Invite speakers you'd like to hear to your events
• Ask questions and offer new perspectives or constructive feedback

An action plan for establishing and cultivating a good research culture can be a way for a team, an institute to implement the debates around the issue in a sustainable and broadl supported way. Implementing an action plan requires clear leadership accountability, a shared understanding of why the plan is important, and a clear process flow for reporting and moving forward.

A good team culture counteracts stress, insecurity and toxic behavior and lets team members do a better job. In particular, a good team culture has the following characteristics:

• Equality: all team members have an equal opportunity and time to talk
• Participation: All team members are given attention
• Empathy: All team members are shown understanding.

Share data, experiences, materials with team members. Hold regular team meetings to discuss not only content, but also collaboration and potential for conflict. Express appreciation and create spaces to address conflicts in a safe environment. Make time for discussions and training that are not directly related to your (research) work, but that will help you move forward as a team. Be aware that a good team culture is a constant task. You can make a team member responsible for monitoring the team culture and for organizing team events.

Publication pressure and competition can lead to an unhealthy academic environment. Institutions can counteract this by creating a collaborative, positive, inclusive work environment. In particular, institutions can:

• Guarantee freedom of research
• Promote a culture of coordination and collaboration
• Support collaboration with stakeholders such as policymakers, funders, industry and commerce, and civil society to reduce competitive and publication pressures
• Introduce research career pathway structures that provide stable and secure careers
• Introduce responsible hiring and evaluation practices
• Ensure a balanced workload

The management of academic institutions is very challenging due to the high complexity of the institutions, the high workload and the wide range of responsibilities. It is therefore important that good managers and good leaders oversee the diverse teams and organizational units. The following points are central to this:

• Defining the responsibilities of leaders and making these responsibilities known to leaders and team members.
• Providing support structures for leaders to facilitate team management
• Providing leaders with the time, guidance, and resources needed to build strong research teams
• Providing training for leaders on the topic of responsible leadership
• Providing training for leaders on responsible leadership
• Preserving freedom of research by providing leaders, and by extension research teams, with appropriate opportunities and choices to determine the direction of their research.

Create contact points to deal with discrimination, unfair treatment, bullying or other conflicts in a serious and straightforward manner. This requires clear processes and procedures, and allegations must be taken seriously. Establishing an independent personnel, counseling, and arbitration body helps ensure that action is always taken without bias. Formalize procedures that protect both whistleblowers and those accused of wrongdoing.

Track record evaluation acts as one of the most powerful gate keepers in academia. Institutions and funders can develop their CV requirements alongside their evaluation practices:

• Define clearly what role CVs play in the overall evaluation and how they are weighted alongside other documents such as project proposals, for example. For each section of a CV, make sure the person filling it in and the one evaluating it understand exactly what it should contain and how it should be evaluated by providing both with the same guidelines.
• Distinguish between achievements realized by the researcher and those endowed upon them by others in order to minimize the Matthew effect in evaluators.
• In order to not reward established researchers perpetually, prioritize current and directly relevant information over historical achievements, even when those may be more prestigious.
• Less is more. Limit the number of achievements and outputs in CVs.
• Recognize and reward a wide range of outputs to foster a more diverse and inclusive research culture. Singling out one type of output, such as publications for example, discounts the richness of research and the many forms through which it can impact academia and society.
• Balance and control incentives. Many laudable policies and incentives bear unintended hidden risks if they are not carefully balanced and implemented. For example, only allowing open access publications on CVs submitted to funding organizations may have opportunity costs if equally valuable aspects such as advancing teaching, diversity and equality, collaboration, sustainability, reproducibility or public engagement are not explicitly required to obtain funding.
• Use the academic age not the biological age of researchers. Including a researcher’s biological age in a CV propagates biases and can discriminate against women, younger and older researchers.
• Encourage narratives instead of lists. Incorporate a narrative section into a CV. Listed items can provide a quick and wellstructured overview but they also entice evaluators to count instead of read, which in turn can favor snap judgements over indepth evaluation.
• Use metrics cautiously. Implement metrics carefully to avoid misuse and make sure evaluators are well aware of their respective definitions and limitations.
• Use established open and interoperable data standards and systems. CV data is valuable as it allows for the analysis of an institution’s policy and performance as well as researcher career statistics.

HuMetricsHSS is an initiative for rethinking humane indicators of excellence in academia, focused particularly on the humanities and social sciences (HSS). Use this tool to guide you thinking to a more values-enacted approach to all kinds of academic work.

Reviewing papers can not only influence wether a paper is accepted or rejected, but also give the authors valuable feedback. When reviewing a publication, strive to "better" your peers rather than to "batter" them. Especially:

• Communicate carefully and kindly
• Do not make assumptions about the quality of a paper based on the author's names and affiliations
• Focus on the research rather than the language
• Where possible, suggest improvements rather than just pointing out mistakes

"Saying no" to requests, opportunities, projects is a skill that must be learned: We usually automatically say yes when asked to do something. To learn to say no better, a list of decisions made can be kept and priorities and limits can be set (e.g. only 1 peer review per month). Clear criteria are needed to make a decision. These can look like the following:

• Does this opportunity fit my research agenda and identity?
• Does it ‘spark joy’ (with a nod to Marie Kondo, doyenne of organization)?
• Do I have time to do a good job without sacrificing existing commitments?
• Does the opportunity leave space for my personal life?
• Am I uniquely qualified to fill this need?

Those who are bullied experience stress, dissatisfaction, emotional exhaustion or depression. People who have experienced bullying isolate themselves socially, make unethical decisions and drop out more often.

Individuals who experience bullying may take the following steps:

• Document interactions and abusive behaviour.
• Contact ombudsperson and contact points
• Network with other targeted persons
• Formulate an exit strategy

People who witness bullying can provide support:

• As a witness: report incidents to ombudsperson and points of contact.
• Demand greater accountability and transparency regarding expectations, consequences and reporting guidelines.
• Raise awareness of academic bullying and harassment by sharing studies, reports and your own experiences.
• Members of bullying investigation committees: Call for unbiased and comprehensive reports on bullying behaviour.