# data[].attributes.body
The wide range of things department PS teams are now asked to do are not well aligned with staff resource in many cases. Routine matters eg. timetabling, assessments, module data are time consuming and repetitive, but usually resourced. Better systems would reduce some friction here. More complex matters, including those which seem to grow annually in the regulations with little thought to the resource needed to execute them (support to study, complaints, appeals, EC admin and support, disability expertise, attendance monitoring with an eye to pastoral support, matters arising from DEPs) need to be supported by bigger teams, clearer boundaries, and more transparent routes to escalation to central teams

# data[].attributes.body
Relationships and departmental identities are often the glue that is holding otherwise stretched systems together and makes difficult or repetitive tasks more bearable as they contribute to a sense of community purpose. Centralising processes may be more efficient in some cases, but carry risks around making roles feel more impersonal and less meaningful

# data[].attributes.body
Unifying/centralising tasks across departments, faculties and even central UCL teams may help with efficiency in some areas (e.g., time management, organisation etc) but risks losing specialist departmental or programme knowledge within PS teams.

# data[].attributes.body
Opportunities for PS staff on Grade 6 to be given more responsibility and leadership over task areas that currently sit with Grade 7 and even Grade 8 managers that are overworked or underperform in terms of mismanaging key tasks . In some departments, transactional task objectives/actions are performed by Grade 6 colleagues but overall task management sit with Grade 7 or even Grade 8 colleagues. Currently, this workload split can sometimes lead to miscommunication or delays in decision

# data[].attributes.body
The way EC requests are dealt with could be streamlined across departments or even UCL wide. At the moment, it feels like each department has got their own way of responding to students with a lot of freedom to set individual deadlines. However, this complicates submissions for external students/students taking modules in other departments. This may be easy to handle on small modules or in smaller departments, but it is tricky for bigger modules/departments. A clear deadline for EC requests would be great, so that these do not extend long beyond mark entry and it would set expectations for all staff and students.

# data[].attributes.body
It would be great to pay particular attention to feedback from grades 6 and below. They are carrying a lot of the work that is done in departments, yet workload is high and continuously getting higher with increased student numbers. As they are one role removed, managers in grade 8 and higher do not always seem to understand the real impact of workload planning and capacity to the point that non-managerial staff have little to no opportunities to work on personal development or progression in their roles.

# data[].attributes.body
A review of JDs and task allocation is definitely needed. There is an overlap of tasks between grades 7 and 8, which is neither great nor fair as it either means a grade 7 is doing grade 8 work without the correct remuneration or a grade 8 is overpaid for the job they are doing. Similarly, fine-tuning grade 6 JDs will assist colleagues in developing their skills with an opportunity to learn what is needed for their next steps rather than just working on a fragment of the task at hand.

# data[].attributes.body
A lot of 'front line' departmental PS staff take on a huge burden of providing welfare support and dealing with complex student issues that would normally require more specialised intervention from higher paid and sufficiently trained staff. It doesn't currently feel like there is enough resource within departments to match the ever-growing number of students with very complex needs, and this work often ends up falling to lower-paid administrative staff when this was never in scope for their job.

Various central processes are also in need of urgent review as these are significant pain points, particularly SoRAs which are difficult to navigate and where there are some cases when the requests for adjustments do not feel 'reasonable', as well as support for managing students who submit continuous EC claims for long-term conditions.

Further central guidance is also needed on the Support to Study regulations (including the requirements for direct referrals), the Academic Misconduct procedure (including investigatory vivas), as well as acceptable EC evidence (e.g. evidence that seems too generic, made to order, from online medical services instead of a physical letter etc.).

# data[].attributes.body
It would be helpful to look at the task allocation within departments and whether tasks sit with the best person. Could tasks be reallocated differently within teams, so as to avoid the same team members dealing with multiple pressure points in the same period of the academic year.

# data[].attributes.body
Reviewing processes that are resource intensive. Are we getting the best value in terms of student satisfaction out of the resources put into these processes. It would be good if we could share processes like timetabling, mark entry, EC processing, Module selection, assessment admin across the faculty and how work intensive they are for each department in terms of hours. Also talk about what level of admin support is realistic to achieve with the resources we have.

# data[].attributes.body
If the EASE process is effective Grade 7 and Grade 8 staff should have more time for planning. There currently is little time to review existing processes or plan ahead.

# data[].attributes.body
More fulfilling roles with better opportunities for development for lower grade staff, that would encourage staff to stay in post longer, which in turn would reduce staff turnover, which is difficult for the team to adjust to.

# data[].attributes.body
Changes to team structures could impact on team cohesion and feeling of belonging.

# data[].attributes.body
Staff leaving before EASE completed due to uncertainty and this causing disruption to teams and the service we provide.

# data[].attributes.body
In the current system, sometimes the wrong things are being outsourced. Eg T&L and Academics would often quite like to take ownership of student experience and building community, but this is often now given to Student Advisers or others from central teams. Instead, we're overwhelmed by trying to provide mental health or disability support that really should be provided by specialists embedded locally. Current system is eroding the value of our expertise, hugely stressful for colleagues, and not always getting students the most appropriate support.

# data[].attributes.body
Being based in departments allows for relationships to develop between different staff groups such as T&L and academic staff. This helps the feeling of having a common goal - the student experience - and helps foster understanding about workload, pressure points, and each other's roles generally.

Being based in departments is also great for team cohesion generally and getting to know each other in smaller groups.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a need for more resources centrally for supporting student wellbeing. Departmental teams are doing a lot of work around mental health and supporting students - but without specialist knowledge or training. This is unfair to staff who end up taking on responsibility for which they are not prepared nor do they have time in their roles for this work.

SoRAs need to be more specific in terms of the support required for individual students - and to be developed in coordination with departments to consider what is feasible within individual disciplines. The method for sharing SoRAs also needs updating. Currently module tutors cannot view SoRAs in Portico without being given permissions in Portico which is at odds with anonymous marking etc.

The ability to better communicate around EC or Academic Misconduct between departments - e.g. via a notes section or similar in Portico which is not tied specifically to webmark entry or similar - would also be helpful.

# data[].attributes.body
It is providing an opportunity for a wider discussion about what is working well and what improvements would be useful.

# data[].attributes.body
Losing my job or having to reapply for my own role.

Changes to my JD which will make me less happy in my role.

Loss of connection to my department and team.

People leaving UCL due to fears such as those expressed above and the impact this will have over the coming year / years.

# data[].attributes.body
The ability to tweak roles to meet specific needs in departments / teams (rather than standardised roles which may not be suitable for all departments)

# data[].attributes.body
Why is admissions being included under Marketing and Comms? Often T&L staff deal with prospective students, all enquiries, work with central admissions, look at applications, manage conversion activities for offer holders etc. Admissions is far from just student recruitment events.

# data[].attributes.body
With more structure and new processes to cause efficiency it seems hopeful all grades can attend training with minimal impact.

# data[].attributes.body
Being left to deal with the after results of a change that nobody likes and causing more resignations and more foot flow out of the door.

# data[].attributes.body
More student events and engagement on a social level similar to other universities. All work and no play does not enforce a good student experience.

# data[].attributes.body
Training that is bespoke to departments on utilising software we have. Many colleagues resist change due to being unfamiliar with tools already at hand. A 'digital diagnosis' of procedures we follow and how best to effectively use them.

# data[].attributes.body
Faculty PS away day to network and learn once or twice an academic year.

# data[].attributes.body
Hopefully more opportunities for autonomy and accountability.

# data[].attributes.body
Conflicts of interest from dept to dept and preferring one route/pathway rather than finding a healthy compromise on tasks. Not one shoe fits all.

# data[].attributes.body
Making a person feel undervalued in the process.

# data[].attributes.body
Losing my job. Isn't this just a way to reduce staff and make redundancies? It'll leave students with an even poorer UCL experience.

# data[].attributes.body
Departments just get asked to take more and more students and there are no signs of this slowing down. We struggle to deal with the increase in workload as it is. Less staff will make this impossible.

# data[].attributes.body
It would be good to be in a position where line managers have time to line manage. It feels as if all of our time is spent making sure the work gets done and deadlines are hit (often having to get involved with transactional work ourselves) and this leaves very little time to develop staff, provide opportunities for side-projects to build experience for those we line manage, or to work on improving processes for the betterment of the team. Work often feels very reactive and we don't have time to make it proactive.

This is particularly important as we have had a high turnover of staff and new staff are not being given the training or shadowing opportunities they need to feel confident in post.

# data[].attributes.body
Admissions has been mis-categorised: It is not a marketing function when a programme is over-subscribed and so the admissions task is one of selecting the most qualified applicants for a place on the programme. Too much or the wrong kind of marketing just sets prospects and applicants who are unsuited to/not competitive for the specific demands of the programme up for disappointment.

# data[].attributes.body
Clarity on how some faculty-based or possibly central roles will resource academic departments better and/or more equally and/or more legibly. Some roles have been created at the faculty level; how those roles serve T&L teams in academic departments remains unclear. Some roles might benefit from the faculty publishing an annual report on the role's aims, objectives, and achievements in the past year.

# data[].attributes.body
Losing hard-earned, valuable, local, programme-specific knowledge. Our roles in academic departments are not purely generic: they are discipline- and programme-specific.

# data[].attributes.body
The variety of work we do to support, in many and various ways, the programmes of study in the academic departments in which we are located. We are positioned locally to know our programmes inside out, to know the staff who work on them, to know our students. In academic departments we are positioned to relate to programme staff and students as individuals, not as numbers or cases. We routinely evaluate the operations supporting our programmes, try new things based on our observations and feedback from staff and students, and see the outcome promptly. The value of our work is tangible.

# data[].attributes.body
We will be siloed into boring roles with less variety than we currently have. We will be de-skilled. The quality of programme administration will decline. Lines of responsibility will be unclear.

# data[].attributes.body
I am not happy by the prospect of having to re-apply for my own role or the role I am doing with added tasks. Also, how will unbiased and fair re-recruitment be ensured?

# data[].attributes.body
Admissions roles sitting within programme teams rather than Marketing/Comms. A knowledge and understanding of our programmes is essential to provide effective advice to prospective students and select the right applicants. These roles are also the essential link between the offer holder and new student stage.

# data[].attributes.body
Removing grade 7 posts to squeeze tasks outwards to grade 6s

# data[].attributes.body
Not seeing a JD before being informed about a structural change

# data[].attributes.body
compulsory redundancies

# data[].attributes.body
Not enough time to review documentation shared to carefully consider our options when the decisions may have been made higher up.

# data[].attributes.body
What could happen for colleagues who are on secondment? Will there posts still be available when they return from secondment?

# data[].attributes.body
Line management streams could be better aligned with task workload. Could PS be better integrated with academic staff on areas where they should be collaborating? PS workload allocations would be very useful too.

# data[].attributes.body
If staff work across more than one department, it would allow more flexibility for staff to take leave throughout the year as there would be more staff to provide cover.

# data[].attributes.body
Our systems do not support us. Simple tasks are made incredibly time consuming because systems don't work or don't talk to another system properly. I hope system improvements are being prioritised UCL-wide as part of the functions review.

# data[].attributes.body
This whole process feels like an excuse to make redundancies. Some individuals may benefit from the change and end up with a better role, but it seems the majority will not.

# data[].attributes.body
Students having a specific T&L contact for their course so that they can feel confident that they have somebody they know and trust to go to. UCL can feel like such a huge and faceless place at times, it would have a very negative effect on the student experience if they had yet another generic email or ticket raising system to replace the value of knowing there is a specific contact that will respond to their emails and see them when they need help.

# data[].attributes.body
A thorough review of JD's as currently there are grade 6 staff with substantial elements of grades 7&8 within their roles.

# data[].attributes.body
How will EASE be measured in terms of student experience, in the long run? Are we linking any KPIs from NSS or PGT APS to it?

# data[].attributes.body
It feels quite demotivating for grade 6 staff who were hoping to progress, that one of the aims of EASE is to restructure the shape of the teams to a triangle shape with less grade 7 & 8 roles and more grade 6 at the bottom. It feels like grade 6 roles won't have the opportunity to progress as they have in the past.

# data[].attributes.body
Centralising a particular role which is based on a thorough knowledge of students' cases and asking another colleague to cover in case of absence, holidays... will not help deliver an accurate and efficient service due to lack of knowledge of specific information and a lack of time to continue with someone's daily routine.

# data[].attributes.body
Lose my job, have to re-apply for my job, or being asked to change working hours.

# data[].attributes.body
Not very many at present as it is not completely clear what is going to happen.

Reducing staff without changing/adjusting/updating the system seems not the final solution.

# data[].attributes.body
Our Departmental Manager has little understanding about Teaching & Learning roles and shows no interest or support in our work. I hope you are not leaning heavily on DM's for info/feedback and using this in decision making.

# data[].attributes.body
Focus group structure in Feb 2025 did not allow to discuss a shared list of challenges: too little time for such a key topic to be unpacked.

# data[].attributes.body
I'm concerned about little or no change after EASE is implemented and not enough improvement in the current challenges faced by T&L Teams.

# data[].attributes.body
Certain Departments (like Economics) are so different to other departments in SHS that ways of working differ - how can we work together on functions when these very functions are often developed to support these different ways of working? For example, flagship projects in Economics are the Job Market and the Seminars delivered by 'visitors' to the department. Ideally they would have a dedicated staff member to support academics in these important tasks but at the moment this is squeezed in to the T&L and Comms team. The Comms Team spend inordinate amount of time keeping academics and their 'visitors' happy but this has little impact on student recruitment and other important Comms tasks. It also has nothing to do with current students or Teaching and Learning so I don't want it taking up my team's time. Where would these tasks sit if no other department has this function?

# data[].attributes.body
I would like to see less 'admin' process between a student casework being raised and the end result. By the time issues are raised by the department, Faculty intervene and refer to the Casework Team or Education Team by which time the nuance has been lost and the student becomes just a number, not a human being that has made the effort to come in the department and discuss their problem. I would like to see more direct work between the Casework team and Departments. We have access to all the same information as Faculty so don't necessarily need this regurgitated in a sharepoint. Having QA checks is all well and good if we know Faculty are just there to support Quality Assurance, for all other student matters, a direct line to central teams would be more effective, especially when it comes to casework. Decisions that are made locally with academic judgement and by senior academics are then vetted by Faculty PS staff which seems odd and outcomes of casework are left to the department to action anyway so what role does the Faculty have here? It is an unnecessary go-between. Departments can't monitor progress or check outcomes and this causes delays and makes it difficult to support the students.

# data[].attributes.body
I would like to see more senior roles (at Grade 8 or 9 and Faculty staff included) working across all departments and actively working to understand them and support them but with a much clearer remit. A clearer division between planning and delivery would help senior PS staff spend more time on strategic decisions than they currently have time to do in departments. Too much time is spent sorting out current issues (because you haven't had time to plan for them) and then poorly planning for the next academic year AT THE SAME TIME. This means T&L managers are constantly fire fighting and don't have the head space to put measures in place to stop working so reactively and so the cycle continues. By understanding the tasks involved in planning for the academic year and the tasks involved in delivering the academic year and separating out these key responsibilities and allocating them to senior teams we can finally find a way to working more effectively

# data[].attributes.body
More time for line managers to actually line manage. Capability and performance management is hugely time consuming so poor behaviours and negative working patterns don't get properly addressed due to a lack of time. Conversely good ways of working are often ignored and not appropriately acknowledged as there is little time to effectively engage with the appraisal process and / or any award / increment request nominations etc.. With six direct reports, a weekly one to one was already taking up one full day per week so this has been moved to monthly as team meetings also take up time. Monthly 1:1s are not always sufficient and I feel constant low level anxiety about not appropriately line managing, supporting and rewarding my direct reports.

# data[].attributes.body
The facilitators of the focus group were not very knowledgeable about Teaching & Learning administration or processes, so we could not use the time effectively as we had to spend time explaining how, for example, exam boards worked at a university.

# data[].attributes.body
Departmental T&L teams allow for a personalised service to students, specific area knowledge and key relationships to grow between colleagues. Teams are able to adjust practices and teams to the needs of their department.

# data[].attributes.body
There is currently not enough resource for the growing pastoral support and specialist procedures students require. This includes things like attendance monitoring, support to study procedures, extenuating circumstances, processing and advising on SoRAs and providing a front-line contact for students in need. A lot of these require specialist knowledge and a level of resilience which colleagues are not given training or support for. A lot of the time, colleagues in lower grades are picking up this responsibility despite it not being a part of their job description and, in my opinion, despite the fact they are not being paid sufficiently for the specialist work they are undertaking. There is very little acknowledgement that the types of cases colleagues are dealing with are difficult things to have to deal with on a daily basis.

# data[].attributes.body
The miro board used for EASE focus groups did not feel very accessible and attempting to use that during the meeting distracted from being able to have worthwhile conversations

# data[].attributes.body
The roles and responsibilities section of the Academic Manual is extremely out of date: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/academic-manual/chapters/chapter-12-duties-and-responsibilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chapter 12 outlines the Duties and Responsibilities of key posts within UCL.

# data[].attributes.body
Generic job titles and descriptions do not acknowledge the fact that some roles require an extremely specialist level of knowledge or particular skills (for example, if you are going to be mainly dealing with ECs and SoRAs it would be appropriate to know that within the Job Description to know that a level of resilience will be required and to attract the right kinds of people with relevant experience to the post).

# data[].attributes.body
An opportunity to offer greater resource to lessen the burden on colleagues who are overworked and are required to be experts on too many conflicting priorities, procedures and policies.

# data[].attributes.body
Some of the main barriers to our roles are systems and regulations outside of our control. Greater automation in Portico, Moodle etc. would be a huge improvement, for example, but is not really in scope of the EASE review.

# data[].attributes.body
The number of different roles and grades in the EASE focus group I attended meant it was difficult to provide appropriate and purposeful feedback. If you are having small group conversations and none of you do the same job or have the same issues, how does that help? It would have been far more useful to group staff by current job role as far as possible.

# data[].attributes.body
That decisions have already been made whilst pretending that we are being consulted and it's an open process. There is evidence that this is indeed happening.

# data[].attributes.body
In our department the role of the MarComms staff is unclear which leads to issues on who does what, and causes additional and unexpected workloads for other PS staff. These staff are then working over their hours and are being taken advantage of.

# data[].attributes.body
That those making the decisions do not fully understand what each of us do. My role is specialised and from engagement so far with senior management, through focus groups etc, this sadly seems to be the case.

# data[].attributes.body
The Faculty Education team have already updated their job titles in line with other faculties that have undergone EASE already, but it is unclear who in the senior team is responsible for what now (this seemed to be much clearer under the old 'Joint Faculties' team). I am also concerned that those on the EASE Delivery Team and Decision Making Group don’t have a strong enough understanding of ground-level roles within departments and in faculty teams, and the content of EASE staff surveys and focus groups unfortunately seems to demonstrate this too.

# data[].attributes.body
I am unsure what ‘student experience’ actually means and including it in everyone’s job titles across departments and faculties doesn’t help to make this a defined concept, but instead makes it even more diluted and ultimately meaningless.

# data[].attributes.body
This could be a good opportunity to review whether the new structure of the faculty education team is right following the disaggregation, i.e. if tasks are sitting at the right grade, if workloads are balanced correctly and if there is enough or too much provision for a particular area

# data[].attributes.body
Department-based teaching administration is vital both to students and staff. The human face of programmes to students cannot be undervalued. The student advisor role has been an INCREDIBLE improvement: the only issue is the FTE is too low for demand. I have witnessed the damage done elsewhere from trying to centralise much of this administration - it never works.

# data[].attributes.body
I am deeply suspicious that this is primarily a cost-cutting exercise. When the systems at UCL are ‘a bit shit’ (not my words - they were said by one of the presenters at the EASE town hall in December 2024 - by as a regular user of UCL systems, I concur), then if the aim of EASE really is to enable  (and I quote again) ‘appealing and fulfilling user experiences’ the surely it would make sense to invest properly in improved systems first. So often, my job at UCL is made more complex, more time-consuming and more frustrating by bad systems; once I find the right people to contact about an issue, there is a massive pool of expertise and talent out there. If the relevant PS people are in my department, then this is never an issue - working together with them towards a common goal (whatever that goal may be) is relatively easy, not to mention rewarding and involving a strong element of collegiality. If you take them away from departments, then that working together towards a common goal will be so much more difficult, more frustrating for all concerned and with a loss of collegiality and common purpose. I very much doubt that appealing and fulfilling user experiences will result.

# data[].attributes.body
Related to the comment above.. totally agree. The SHS Faculty already have the EASE job titles and have been re-organised in line with EASE functions in other Faculties (G9 Head of ESE, G8 QA Manager, G8 Casework etc) maybe this had to be expedited because of the disaggregation of the faculties but this has not been made clear. This lack of transparency gives the unfortunate impression of the Faculty sorting themselves out before departmental staff who won’t have the opportunity to apply for these roles once the structure is confirmed. Some transparency and further explanation around this would help build trust in the process overall for departmental staff

# data[].attributes.body
Concerned that those making decisions are are mainly quite new to UCL and have not always demonstrated appreciation of front-line expertise or our ability to set our own priorities. If new plan is unpopular or unworkable in practice, competent, experienced staff are the most likely to leave

# data[].attributes.body
I’d like to see a cultural change in the perception of ‘them and us’ mentality in terms of the support to the student experience that many in professional services contribute to. Professional Services staff in education focused roles are members of the education ecosystem which includes academic staff. The dismissal of experience over roles and grades is unhelpful and divisive.

# data[].attributes.body
I’m concerned that my role will be shoehorned into a particular pathway which may not be appropriate and I will have no option but to accept it. This process feels like I’m reduced to a ‘resource’, easily replaced with no appreciation of my commitment, goodwill or expertise. Many in departments are committed to their teams and have a broad range of department knowledge which cannot be quantified. We are not machines that operate ‘functions’. We make decisions based on our extensive knowledge and experience (which can be discipline or people specific). This will be lost and will be less efficient if the ‘function’ is the focus, rather than the context of role.

# data[].attributes.body
I hope that there will be accountability for decisions made to changing roles or redundancies. Will the faculty senior leadership team be willing to be transparent about their decisions (and allow for an appeals process to clarify and amend misinterpretations)?

# data[].attributes.body
It is unclear what EASE wants to achieve in terms of:

-service to students

-service to staff

across departments?

Any goals / standards we wish to retain / enhance? What the KPIs in these areas?

That should be the final aim no? (together with us feeling possibly gratified about our job / having manageable workloads)

# data[].attributes.body
There has been no mention of UCL East and how you plan to ensure balanced representation of PS teams across both campuses through the EASE design. Will there be PS teams of both postgraduate (PG) and undergraduate (UG) students on both campuses? It seems the main campus is always the priority. Space is already an issue at UCL East, and although the site is new and not at full capacity, it is likely to become a problem for PS staff and students. How will you guarantee a smooth transition for students and PS staff to enhance the student experience, given the concerns of PS Staff and academics in UCL East?

# data[].attributes.body
The timing of the changes indicated at the SHS March town hall is a serious issue.

We have had repeated assurances that every effort will be made to minimise stress on staff.

Staff have indicated, repeatedly, that introducing the new structure during the autumn would have the worst possible impact on everyone.   We know this from experience.  I’ve been through that twice and the impact on both staff and students was appalling each time, with ramifications for a long time afterwards.  The fact that it is even being suggested now indicates that the assurances about wanting to minimise stress are worthless.

Has any other Faculty implemented their restructure during the autumn term?  If so, what is their feedback on the experience?   If not, then why is it being suggested fur SHS?

Could the changes be introduced more flexibly and gradually?  For example, if, when the final model is in place , in May, it is clear that for G6 there will mostly be a need to transition to a new role rather than a need to interview, could their transition, from overstaffed areas to understaffed, take place during July, so in place ahead of start of year and ready to provide better support to programmes during the busiest phase?  That should give an early indication of how well the new structure was likely to work, and allow more time for planning and fine-tuning before implementing change for the higher staff grades – maybe interviewing in November/December, with the aim that the whole transition is complete by the end of February?  (January, as the beginning of term 2, is another peak for workload so big changes are best avoided.)  A changeover finishing in April seems even better, and it will be interesting to see the feedback to Science from the student surveys.

I realise that there is a huge amount of concern about the restructure.  A clear assurance that no one will be changing roles between September and November, except in any isolated case where it happens to be a logical time to move, would go a long way towards alleviating that.

# data[].attributes.body
I refuse to believe that there is no information about redundancies already made by UCL as part of this process. There will be payroll and HR records, as a minimum. The issue here is transparency. I have no doubt that Katie and Ben are being honest when they say they don't know, but someone does and sharing at least the number per Faculty should be a basic part of the information available to staff.

# data[].attributes.body
Some staff in EASE teams are not aware of the full remit of EASE roles, only what they do directly, which means sometimes some activities may have been missed? Also, some of them might say, 'oh I don't really work with MarComms' or 'my DM isn't involved in EASE at all' and the reality is quite different....