Academic administrators' and faculty's perceptions of current and ideal reward systems: a multisite investigation
Abstract
Objectives
(1) To investigate academic leaders' and faculty members' perceptions of current faculty reward systems and whether these systems engage faculty in achieving institutional missions; (2) to identify what faculty and administrators in higher education perceive to be the ideal faculty reward system for the future. A secondary objective was to assess whether congruence exists between faculty and administrators' perceptions of reward systems (both current and ideal).
Methods
The study was conducted at five institutions; subjects were university administrators and faculty. A cross-sectional survey design was used to assess what key factors are considered in the current reward system for faculty, what factors ideally should be part of the faculty reward system, and how motivated faculty are in advancing the mission of their respective institutions. Faculty and administrators' surveys were compared using t-tests. Data were further explored using personal interviews with university administrators. These data were evaluated for common themes.
Results
Administrators perceived that current reward systems primarily consider classroom teaching, research, and student advising more importantly than do faculty. Administrators also perceive the ideal reward system should primarily consider research more importantly than do faculty. Based on interviews, salaries play a large role in current reward systems. An ideal reward structure would require appropriate funds to both engage and reward productive faculty.
Conclusions
Some divergence exists between administrators' expectations and that of faculty. Administrators recognize the need to engage and reward productive faculty, but currently, limited financial resources restrict their ability to do so monetarily.
aDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy and Health Professions, Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, NE
bSocial and Administrative Sciences, School of Pharmacy, The University of Mississippi, Thad Cochran Research Center, University, MS
cCollege of Pharmacy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
dDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Butler University, Indianapolis, IN
eDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS
Corresponding author. Michael S. Monaghan, PharmD, Professor and Chair, Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy and Health Professions, Creighton University Medical Center, 2500 California Plaza, Omaha, NE 68178
ABSTRACT