Ambiguity for some job types

[drmarkwslater]

I wasn't certain how to classify jobs for a few adverts:

• where extensive use of research software was required but maybe not actual software development, outside their own personal use for completing the project at least.
• Group Leaders/Managers that oversee groups developing or making extensive use of, research software
• Lecturer where no explicit software development is stated but to do any additional research (which may or may not have been stated) you would expect code development would be needed, e.g. Applied Maths lecturer in a research group.

I suppose this boils down to: should we go strictly on what is in the advert, or, what we think the amount of dev work that would actually be needed? And also, how do we classify use of research software, e.g. use 'R' a lot and write a few scripts but not actually developing anything beyond that?

I'm guessing that most of this is covered by the 'What is software in this context' point but maybe add a few specific examples to the docs so it's a bit clearer? Thanks!

[SimonHettrick]

I'll deal with this point by adding examples, and further explanation about how far implications can be taken, into the guidance for the classifier.

[mjsandells]

I think this highlights how rubbish the job descriptions are. One was all about the collaborative project (which did involve software development, and also biochemistry lab stuff) but nothing about what that particular person would actually do.

[SimonHettrick]

I've updated the instructions to provide answers to the points raised by @drmarkwslater. It's difficult to provide completely unambiguous guidance, because so much depends on the job advert. However, I think we've provided more help in interpreting the adverts without biasing the decisions people will make.