This section examined faculty perceptions of both the tenure and merit review processes. Faculty as a whole believed that some of the most important factors in tenure decisions include the following: regular reviews, securing a grant, getting along well with the “right” people, and publishing high quality research/creative work. The least important factors were perceived to be one’s particular research area, receiving high teaching evaluations from students, and doing one’s fair share of committee and service work.

Three quarters of respondents believed that tenure procedures are clearly defined and that they are appropriate, but only 57% agreed that the processes and criteria used to reach tenure decisions are evenly applied. In addition, three quarter believed that full professors should undergo regular performance reviews by their peers.

Assistant professors were the least likely to believe that tenure procedures are clearly defined, while associate professors took the most negative view of the tenure process overall. Full professors, for their part, took the most positive stance toward tenure procedures and criteria, but they were the least in favor of a regular performance review for full professors.

Negative comments to an open-ended question regarding the tenure process outnumbered positive comments four to one. The problems most commonly described included: 1) the criteria are applied inconsistently; 2) the criteria are not well understood or are secretive; 3) research, teaching, and service should all be valued; 4) the tenure standards are too low.

Regarding the annual merit review process, approximately half the respondents believed that the process is clearly defined, that the criteria used to reach merit decisions are applied fairly from year to year, and that the process has significant value for faculty development. Assistant professors were the least likely to perceive that the process is clearly defined, while associate professors held the most negative views about the merit review process, just as they did concerning the tenure process.

One in three respondents answered the open-ended question regarding merit review and in this case negative comments outnumbered positive comments ten to one. Across the schools, respondents repeatedly cited four problems concerning the process: 1) the criteria are unclear, mysterious, and unfair; 2) there is not enough money in any given year to make a difference; 3) research, teaching, and service should all be rewarded, rather than just research; and 4) the criteria are inconsistently and unfairly applied. Clearly, three of these four problems were commonly cited regarding the tenure process as well.