•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This article analyzes the tenure and promotion evaluation process from a university president perspective, framing personnel judgments as collective sense making rather than discovery of objective truth. It identifies five procedural characteristics shared across diverse institutions: incremental policy evolution, multilayered review, pervasive faculty dissatisfaction, recursive feedback across decision levels, and the centrality of fairness, explaining how each generates divergent interpretations among reviewers. Attention is directed to institutional mission alignment, clarity of criteria for teaching research and service, robust documentation practices, and time constraints that shape recommendation quality. By linking leadership communication, organizational culture, and academic governance, this article offers administrators and faculty a conceptual framework for improving transparency, consistency, and credibility in faculty advancement decisions.

Share

COinS
 

Accessibility Statement

This item was created or digitized prior to April 24, 2027, or is a reproduction of legacy media created before that date. It is preserved in its original, unmodified state specifically for research, reference, or historical recordkeeping. In accordance with the ADA Title II Final Rule, the University Libraries provides accessible versions of archival materials upon request. To request an accommodation for this item, please submit an accessibility request form.