[Itech] Fwd: Tomorrow's Professor eNewsletter: 1371. Hiring from the Institution's Point of View

[Teresa Franklin]

Hello Graduates,

As many of you prepare to seek new positions in instructional design or as
faculty in universities, it would serve you well to read the article below.

Best wishes,
Dr. Franklin




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rick Reis <reis at stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:26 PM
Subject: Tomorrow's Professor eNewsletter: 1371. Hiring from the
Institution's Point of View
To: tomorrows-professor at lists.stanford.edu



   Please click here if e-mail below is not displayed correctly.
<http://cgi.stanford.edu/~dept-ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/enewsletter.php?msgno=1371>
   [image:
Tomorrow's Professor eNewsletter, Sponsored by Stanford Center for Teaching
and Learning]
*Further complicating the situation is the tendency of departments to
advertise positions simultaneously at the assistant and associate professor
levels, leaving the area of specialization entirely open.  In that case,
the department has clearly chosen to "see who's out there," planning to
make an offer to whoever in its view is the best candidate. *

1371. Hiring from the Institution's Point of View

*Folks:*

[image: Rick Reis]The posting below gives some great advice on hiring from
the institution's point of view.  It is from Chapter 2 - Hiring from the
Institution's Point of View, in the book, *The Academic Job Search Handbook*,
by Julia Miller Vick and Jennifer S. Furlong, University of Pennsylvania
Press, Philadelphia. [http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/ ]. Copyright © 2008
Julia Miller Vick and Jennifer S. Furlong. Reprinted with permission.

Regards,

Rick Reis
reis at stanford.edu
 <reis at stanford.edu>        Anyone can subscribe     SUBSCRIBE
<https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/tomorrows-professor>      Visit
our website     TomProf On-line
<http://cgi.stanford.edu/~dept-ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/postings.php>      Visit
us on Facebook and Twitter   [image: Tomorrow's Professor Facebook Page]
<http://www.facebook.com/TomorrowsProfessor> [image: Tomorrow's Professor
Twitter] <http://twitter.com/tomorrowsprof>         UNSUBSCRIBE
<https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/tomorrows-professor>
    UP NEXT: Mentoring the "Terminal Associate Professor"



Tomorrow's Graduate Students and Postdocs

---------- 2,574 words ----------

Hiring from the Institution's Point of View

Just as your vita presents the public face of your qualifications in a
simple, organized form, without revealing the full complexity of your
individual life, an advertised position is the public presentation of an
outcome of complex negotiations within a department and possibly within an
institution.

It will generally be impossible for you, as a job candidate, to have a full
understanding of what goes on behind the scenes.  Even if you are fortunate
enough to have an inside contact who can give you additional perspective,
it is still extremely unlikely that you will know everything about the
hiring decision.  Thus, throughout the job search process, you will need to
present yourself in the strongest fashion possible without tying yourself
into knots trying to second guess the institution that has advertised the
position.

However, here are some of the considerations that might be at work.

Defining and Advertising a Position

It may be fairly easy for a department to obtain approval and funding for a
renewable lectureship or sabbatical replacement position.  When a
tenure-track position is listed, however, it reflects efforts by a
department to maintain or strengthen its hiring position vis-à-vis other
departments in the school.  In today's financially stringent climate,
approval to fill a position that has been vacated is not granted
routinely.  The department that has lost a faculty member must defend to
its dean the necessity of replacing the position.  Meanwhile, other
departments are lobbying to expand their faculty.  If the hiring department
has been given a new position, that very fact may reflect even more intense
departmental lobbying.

The definition of the position more frequently reflects discussion internal
to the department.  In some cases the definition is obvious: the department
absolutely must replace a faculty member who has a particular expertise.
Perhaps, too, the department has a long-range plan that calls for
increasing areas of strength or adding new areas of expertise.  At other
times, there may be discussion within the department about how the new
position should be defined.  Some want the department to move in one
direction, some in another.  The debate is resolved to the point necessary
to define and advertise a position, but it does not necessarily mean that
everyone has been convinced.

Further complicating the situation is the tendency of departments to
advertise positions simultaneously at the assistant and associate professor
levels, leaving the area of specialization entirely open.  In that case,
the department has clearly chosen to "see who's out there," planning to
make an offer to whoever in its view is the best candidate.  New Ph.D.s are
often unnecessarily frightened by an ad that mentions positions at both
levels.  The hiring department will not compare a new Ph.D. to a senior
faculty member.  The new Ph.D. will be compared to other new Ph.D.s, the
more senior faculty member to other more senior faculty members, and an
offer will be made to the individual who both is the best candidate
relatively to his or her peer group and can best fit the needs of the
department.

Implications for Candidates

A department that has gone to considerable trouble to get approval to hire
for a position will not take kindly to applicants who seem to view it as a
second-best alternative to be abandoned as soon as something better comes
along.  Therefore, it is important that you as a candidate convey a serious
interest in the position throughout the search process. Don't get bogged
down in self-comparisons to imagined other candidates.  Concentrate on
communicating what you have to offer.  The position may be even more
appropriate and desirable than you realize.

Screening Candidates

In a small department, all faculty members may be involved in hiring,
whereas in a larger one the logistics of managing the search, and a good
deal of decision making, may be delegated to a search committee. In some
cases the committee may include a student representative who could be
either a graduate student or an undergraduate, depending on the focus of
the institution.  In most hiring bodies, there will be some members of the
group who are intensely interested in who is ultimately hired and who take
the process very seriously; others who take participation seriously, but
view it as an obligation that interferes with things they would rather be
doing; and, possibly, an individual who wishes he or she were elsewhere and
who participates without giving the process full attention.

The hiring group will read through the materials submitted in response to
the advertisement.  At this stage, candidates get the least careful
screening because it simply is not possible to do an in-depth evaluation of
what may be up to several hundred sets of materials sent in response to an
advertisement.  Individuals in the hiring group are probably not yet wedded
to the candidates they prefer, because most of these are still
abstractions, presented on paper.

Therefore, if someone asks the group to pay special attention to a
candidate at this stage, the request is likely to be honored.  The request
may take the form of a phone call from a dean who says, "X is the spouse of
Y, who is department Z's top choice.  We'll lose her unless we can make an
offer to him.  See what you think." It may take the form of a phone call
from a department member's former dissertation adviser who says, "Dr. L. is
the best student the department has had in the last five years and she is
seriously interested in this job.  Can you be sure to look at her
application carefully?"

In some cases, those who are to be interviewed at a convention or who are
to be directly invited to campus for an interview will be chosen from the
materials sent initially.  However, as the money available to bring
candidates to campus interviews tightens, departments are often trying to
narrow the pool of candidates to a smaller group, who will be asked to
provide additional materials such as dissertation chapters or articles
and/or to have initial screening interviews by phone.

Implications for Candidates

As will be discussed in detail in later chapters, make all the materials
used in your application clear and accessible, even to someone who is not a
specialist in your area.  Don't be afraid to be slightly redundant. For
example, if your cover letter repeats some of the material in your vita,
someone who does not pay full attention to one may pick up key points from
the other.

Consider asking a senior faculty member from your Ph.D.-granting
institution whether he or she knows anyone at the school to which you are
applying, and then ask for a phone call on your behalf.  This call can draw
attention to your candidacy and help keep your application in the group of
those chosen for further examination.

Once you apply for a position, be prepared to submit additional supporting
materials promptly and/or to be interviewed by phone on very short notice.

Interviewing

In some fields, departments interview many candidates at a national
convention and then invite a smaller group for second interviews on
campus.  In other fields, the campus interview is the first and only one.
Once the interviewing process begins, issues of personality, style, and the
department's own history begin to come into play, in unpredictable
fashion.  Most departments have their own histories of hiring "successes"
and "mistakes."  Naturally they will attempt to repeat one and avoid the
other.  Therefore, statements made by a candidate during an interview may
have resonances unknown to the candidate.  For example, if your remarks
closely parallel those of a candidate hired two years ago, they will
probably be heard differently depending on the current consensus as to
whether hiring that candidate was a coup or a mistake.

As a candidate, you are unlikely to have a full understanding of power and
influence within the department.  Obviously, you must be chosen by the
hiring committee and approved by the chairperson.  In addition, however,
there may exist individuals of sufficient influence that the department may
be reluctant to hire anyone to whom they strongly object.  In some
institutions, particularly community colleges, non-departmental faculty
members and administrators are significantly involved in hiring.

Implications for Candidates

When your interview is scheduled, find out with whom you'll meet during the
course of your visit.  Get all the firsthand information about the
department and institution that you can possibly gather.  However, you
should recognize that you are likely to gain, at best, only a partial
understanding of the departmental dynamics.  Therefore, don't try to second
guess your interviewers. Again, concentrate on the clear communication of
what you have to say.

Decision Making

After a small number of candidates have been invited to campus for an
interview, the department must decide to whom to offer the position.
Sometimes the choice is simple; sometimes it is agonizing.  Faced with the
real people who have interviewed for the position, rather than the "ideal"
represented in the ad, the department may need to make very concrete
trade-offs.  What if the candidate who is ideal in terms of the qualities
described in the ad has charmed half of the department and totally
alienated the other?  What if no one really fits the job that was
envisioned, but one candidate seems outstanding in every other respect?

The department must make its decisions, knowing that job offers and
acceptances will occur over the space of a few months.  It knows the
highest salary that it can pay, and it knows that it must give its
first-choice candidate at least a week or two to decide whether to accept
the offer.  It may believe that the first-choice candidate is highly
unlikely to accept the position, and that the second-choice candidate, also
very good, is likely to accept, but only if the position is offered within
the next few weeks.  Finally, if none of the candidates seem entirely
satisfactory, the department must decide whether to leave the position
vacant for a year and risk losing it to some kind of budgetary constraint,
in the hope of reopening the search the following year.

Usually the department comes to a decision that balances competing
priorities.  Depending upon the department's style, a job may be offered to
the candidate who has not alienated anyone, to the candidate who is most
strongly backed by a few influential department members, to the candidate
who appears most neutral in terms of some controversy that has split the
department, or to a candidate chosen in a close vote.  Depending on the
institution, the department's decision will be endorsed by the
administration or must be vigorously defended to it.

Implications for Candidates

Do your best to accept the fact that hiring is usually a matter not of
choosing the "best" candidate by some set of abstract criteria, but of
making a reasonable choice among valid, if competing, priorities, an
inherently political process.  Do your best, therefore, not to dismiss the
process as somehow unethical.  If each member of a hiring committee
honestly thinks a different candidate is the best choice for the
department, a decision must be made somehow.  Unless it is to be settled by
a duel or a flip of a coin, it must be decided through a negotiated process
that acknowledges several factors not necessarily known to the candidates.

If you insist on thinking either that there is an obviously "best"
candidate for every job and that every time that person has not been chosen
an immoral decision has been made, or that hiring is a random process
amounting to no more than the luck of the draw, you will diminish your own
ability to understand the difference between what is and is not in your
control.  Worse, you risk becoming angry, bitter, or cynical and therefore
approaching potential employers with a visible presumption that they will
be unfair.

Approach a department as if you expect it to behave in a fair and
reasonable fashion.  Make it easy for those who would like to hire you to
lobby for you, by being well prepared, by communicating an attitude of
respect for everyone you meet during the course of a day, and by making all
your written application materials as clear and strong as you can.  Let
your enthusiasm for the position be obvious.

Keep a record of the people with whom you speak during each application.
Even if you do go elsewhere, you can keep in touch with them, send papers
to them, and cultivate a relationship with them over the years.  They may
invite you back after you establish a reputation elsewhere.

Negotiations and Acceptance

Once a position is offered, there will likely be a period of negotiation
about salary, terms of employment (for example, research facilities, or how
many classes are to be taught in the first year), and time given the
candidate to make a decision.  Sometimes there will be delays, as the
department must receive approval from a higher level before making a
specific offer.  Usually other finalists will be notified of a decision
only after a candidate has definitely accepted a position.

Implications for Candidates

Understand that delays may be inevitable.  However, if your own situation
changes (for example, if you get another offer), do not hesitate to let the
department know immediately.  If you are turned down, it's natural to
wonder why.  Except in the event that you have a friend in the department,
you're unlikely to find out.  However, you may wish to ask for constructive
feedback.  If you do ask, concentrate your questions on what you might have
done to strengthen your presentation, rather than on how the decision was
made.

Hiring and "Inside Candidates"

Sometimes, at the conclusion of a search, it is widely perceived that the
advertised position was not truly open.  There was a high probability at
the outset that an offer would be made to someone who was already within
the department; to someone whom the department had been wooing for the last
few years; to a member of a group whose underrepresentation among faculty
members was viewed as an intolerable situation; to a clone of those already
in the department; and so on.

Implications for Candidates

Compete for every job you want as if you have a genuine chance of being
offered it, whatever you guess or have been told.  That way you best
position yourself to take advantage of the uncertainty inherent in every
hiring situation.  Maybe the department does have a strong front-runner,
but he or she will not accept the position in the end.  Maybe you are very
unlikely to get this job, but the campus interview you are offered will
help you polish your interviewing skills so that you will do better at the
next interview.

Remember that, even if you are not successful in getting a particular job,
you have left behind an impression of abilities, talents, and personality.
Frequently, faculty members will talk with colleagues at other schools
about good candidates whom they interviewed but were not able to hire.
Even if your interview at a particular school is unsuccessful, it can serve
as good advertising, depending upon how you deal with the interview
situation and, particularly, with any rejection.

When you are hired, there may well be disappointed candidates who think
that you had some kind of unfair advantage, so try to be generous in your
assessment of the decisions made by what are, by and large,
well-intentioned people.
         "Desktop faculty development 100 times per year."
Over 50,000 subscribers at over 850 institutions in more than 100 countries

TOMORROW'S PROFESSORSM eMAIL NEWSLETTER
<http://cgi.stanford.edu/%7Edept-ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/postings.php>

Archives of all past postings can be found here
<http://cgi.stanford.edu/%7Edept-ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/postings.php>:

Sponsored by Stanford Center for Teaching and Learning
<http://ctl.stanford.edu>

Check out the Tomorrow's Professor Blog
<http://derekbruff.org/blogs/tomprof/>

NOTE: To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to the Tomorrows-Professor List click HERE
<https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/tomorrows-professor>
  [image: Tomorrow's Professor Facebook Page]
<http://www.facebook.com/TomorrowsProfessor> [image: Tomorrow's Professor
Twitter] <http://twitter.com/tomorrowsprof>


--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==
tomorrows-professor mailing list
tomorrows-professor at lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/tomorrows-professor






-- 


*"A teacher affects eternity; [she]he can never tell where the influence
stops." - Henry Adams*Dr. Teresa Franklin
Director, The OHIO Group
Professor, Instructional Technology
Fulbright Research Scholar to Turkey 2013-14
Department of Educational Studies
The Gladys W. and David H. Patton College of Education
Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701
740-541-8847 (cell)
also: franklinteresa at gmail.com

*~~~~~~Ohio University -- The best student-centered learning *experience in
America~~~~
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserv.ohio.edu/pipermail/itech/attachments/20141129/f00170c8/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 45EC5348-8056-45E0-B523-A82C1ACBB44F[2].png
Type: image/png
Size: 18041 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://listserv.ohio.edu/pipermail/itech/attachments/20141129/f00170c8/attachment-0001.png