Communication #23:
Appointment and Review of Faculty Members With Budgeted Joint Appointments

Download PDF version (.pdf)
Download Word version (.docx)
__________________________________

Overview

This communication provides guidance to units for the appointment and review of faculty members with budgeted (that is, %-time) appointments in more than one unit or faculty members whose scholarship bridges multiple disciplines.  Fundamental to managing joint appointments and/or faculty engaged in interdisciplinary scholarship are principles of mutual cooperation, open sharing of views, and fairness to the faculty member.  While some procedures are left to the choice of the units, the goal of this document is to ensure that all relevant views are expressed at times of appointment and review, that effective communication is promoted between units and with the faculty member, and in general that a clear and orderly process is used for decisions affecting faculty members with joint appointments or engaged in interdisciplinary scholarship.

Initial Appointment

Budgeted Joint Appointment of New Faculty Members

To secure the initial appointment, the executive officers of the appointing units must execute a joint letter to their dean(s) requesting the appointment.  The letter must describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities in each unit (e.g., instructional load, advising, committee service), the rights of the faculty in the units (e.g., voting) and which is the designated home unit (for administrative purposes).  The designated home unit must be able to host tenured appointments and normally will be the unit with the largest percentage of the individual’s appointment, or that represents the individual’s primary discipline.  In the case of appointments split equally between multiple units, the units will decide by mutual agreement, having taken the faculty member’s preferences into account, which unit will be designated as the home unit.  The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review and the subsequent promotion and tenure reviews.  The home unit also will initiate the processing of changes of status and other administrative actions.

If the appointing units are housed in different colleges, and if the deans of the colleges approve the proposed appointment, the dean of the college in which the home unit is located will extend an offer to the candidate.  The dean’s letter of offer will describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities to each unit, and will indicate which of the units has been designated the “home unit.”

Creating Additional Budgeted Appointments for Current Faculty

To create an additional budgeted appointment in another unit for a current faculty member, the executive officers of the units involved must write a joint letter to the dean(s) requesting the additional appointment.  That letter must describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities in each unit (e.g., instructional load, advising, committee service), and certify the faculty member’s acceptance of the proposed additional appointment and division of responsibilities between the units.  The letter must also describe any financial arrangements the units have agreed to (e.g., a transfer of recurring finds from the new appointing unit to the currently appointing unit) concerning the proposed additional appointment.

If the appointing units are housed in different colleges, the deans of the colleges involved must approve the proposed additional appointment.

Single Unit Appointment of New Faculty Members Engaged in Interdisciplinary Scholarship

To secure the initial appointment, if the executive officer of the appointing unit in consultation with the faculty member finds it appropriate and useful, input should be sought from the executive officers of the units that interdisciplinary scholarship spans. The recommendation to seek input from other units could be initiated by the executive officer or by the faculty member.  The input sought pertains to the value of the interdisciplinary scholarship area to their unit, and the ability of the unit to participate in the mentoring and review of the faculty member. Taking into consideration the input from the other executive officers, the executive officer of the appointing unit will write a letter to the dean documenting the understanding among the unit executive officers. The letter could describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities in the appointing unit (e.g., instructional load, advising, committee service), the rights of the faculty in the appointing unit (e.g., voting), and the participation of the other units in the development and review of the faculty.  This document refers to the units that agree to participate in the development and review of the faculty as “agreeing units.” When agreements cannot be reached with a potential agreeing unit, this should not be considered negatively for the faculty member but as information to be used by the executive officer of the appointing unit and by the faculty member to inform the trajectory of future development.  In addition, it is expected that, in consultation with the faculty member, these agreements may be revised for appropriateness and usefulness through the career of the faculty member as that faculty member’s scholarship trajectory changes.  In any event, the appointing unit will initiate the third-year review and the subsequent promotion and tenure reviews.  The appointing unit also will initiate the processing of changes of status and other administrative actions.

If the appointing unit and the agreeing units are housed in different colleges, and if the deans of the colleges approve the understanding among the units, if any, the dean of the college in which the appointing unit is located will extend an offer to the candidate.  The dean’s letter of offer will describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities to the appointing unit and the participation of the other units in the development and review of the faculty.

Managing Single Unit Appointment of Current Faculty Members who Change Areas of Interdisciplinary Scholarship

As a faculty member’s scholarship trajectory changes, if the executive officer of the appointing unit in consultation with the faculty member finds it appropriate and useful, input can be sought from the executive officers of the units bridged by the emerging interdisciplinary scholarship.  The recommendation to seek input from other units can be initiated by the executive officer or by the faculty member.  The input sought pertains to the value of the interdisciplinary scholarship area to their unit, the ability of the unit to participate in the mentoring and review of the faculty member, and the nature of that participation.  Taking into consideration the input from the other executive officers, the executive officer of the appointing unit will write a letter to the faculty member.  The letter will describe the participation of the other units in the development and review of the faculty.  This document refers to the units that agree to participate in the development and review of the faculty as “agreeing units.” When agreements cannot be reached with a potential agreeing unit, this should not be considered negatively for the faculty member, but as information to be used by the executive officer of the appointing unit to support the development of the faculty member.  In addition, it is expected that in consultation with the faculty member, these agreements may be revised for appropriateness and usefulness through the career of a faculty member as her/his scholarly trajectory changes.  In any event, the appropriating unit will initiate the third-year review and the subsequent promotion and tenure reviews, if applicable.  The appointing unit also will initiate the processing of changes of status and other administrative actions.

Mentoring

Budgeted Joint Appointments Mentoring

The designated home unit will initiate a mentoring arrangement.  This mentoring arrangement will involved the participation of, and will represent the views of, all appointing units.  Either of the following procedures may be used, although the procedure for collaborative mentoring is preferred.

Separate Unit Mentoring

Following its own procedures for mentoring faculty, each appointing unit will establish a mentoring arrangement in consultation with the faculty member.  The mentors from each unit should communicate with each other the mentoring provided to the faculty member.

Collaborative Mentoring Committee

It is preferred that the units establish a collaborative mentoring arrangement in consultation with the faculty member, employing mentors from all appointing units.  This arrangement should follow the faculty mentoring procedure agreed to by the unit executive officers of the appointing units, typically adopting either those procedures of one unit or an amalgamation of procedures from multiple units.

Faculty member with Single Unit Appointment Engaged in Interdisciplinary Scholarship

Following its own procedures for mentoring faculty, the appointing unit should establish a mentoring arrangement in consultation with the faculty member.  If agreed by the executive officer of the appointing unit and the faculty member, the mentoring arrangement also could involve the participation of and could represent the views of the agreeing units.

Third-Year Review

Budgeted Joint Appointments

The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review.  The review will involve the participation of and will represent the views of all appointing units.  Either of the following procedures may be used, although the procedure for collaborative review is preferred.  Regardless of which procedure is used, the report of the third-year review must be approved by the dean(s) before it is transmitted to the faculty member (see Communication No. 13).

Separate Unit Reviews

Each appointing unit conducts a review following its own procedures for reviewing faculty.  The units will share with each other the results of their separate reviews and will confer about the report(s) to be issued.  Every effort should be made to provide consistent advice to the faculty member.  The units may send to the dean(s) for approval and subsequent transmittal to the faculty member either separate reports or a joint report signed by both executive officers.  Where considerable discrepancies exist in the evaluative reports at this stage of a faculty member’s career, the possibility of restructuring the joint appointment should be considered.

Collaborative Review

It is preferred that the units conduct a collaborative review, employing a committee comprised of members from all appointing units and jointly charged by the unit executive officers.  The finding of the joint committee will be sent to the units for evaluation, and the units will confer about the kind of report(s) to be issued.  Depending on the final evaluations, the units may prepare and send to the deans(s) for approval and transmittal to the faculty member either a single joint report signed by the executive officers or separate reports from each executive officer reflecting the different views of each unit.

When separate reports are issued, each will be copied to the other appointing unit.  Then a joint report is issued, observations and recommendations that are relevant to one unit and not the other or differences in assessment between units should be articulated carefully so that the faculty member is informed of opinions that are held by both units and those that are important to each of the units separately.

Where considerable discrepancies exist in the evaluations of appointing units at this stage of a faculty member’s career, the possibility of restructuring the joint appointment should be considered.

Faculty Member with Single Unit Appointment Engaged in Interdisciplinary Scholarship

The appointing unit will initiate the third-year review following its own procedures for reviewing faculty.  If agreed by the executive officer of the appointing unit, having taken the faculty member’s preferences into account, the review could involve the participation of, and could represent the views of, the appointing unit and the agreeing units.  The report of the third-year review must be approved by the executive officer of the next higher unit before that report is transmitted to the faculty member (see Communication No. 13)

Annual Reviews and Salary Recommendations

Budgeted Joint Appointments

Each appointing unit should conduct an annual review of the performance of the faculty member using its regular evaluative procedures.  The executive officers of the units should then discuss the results of the reviews in order to ensure that pertinent information about performance in each unit is shared across the units.  Each unit should convey its assessment to the faculty member, again, using its regular procedures.  Each executive officer should provide a recommended salary increment that is appropriate for the performance within that unit.  While units should discuss the increment, it is not required that they reach agreement.  If the units do not agree on the salary increment, one unit may provide a higher increment to be applied at the appropriate percentage with the understanding that the underlying percentage split in the appointment will not be changed.  The unit providing the higher increment will continue to be responsible for the additional increment at such time as the faculty’s joint appointment ends unless some other agreement is made between the units.

Faculty Member with Single Unit Appointment Engaged in Interdisciplinary Scholarship

The appointing unit should conduct an annual review of the performance of the faculty member using its regular evaluative procedures.  If agreed by the executive officer of the appointing unit and the faculty member, the review could involve the participation of, and could represent the views of, the appointing unit and the agreeing units. The executive officers of the appointing unit should provide a recommended salary increment that is appropriate for the faculty performance.  The executive officer of the appointing unit will make the final determination on salary, after taking into consideration the views of the agreeing units, but also assuring that the faculty member’s contributions are recognized in a manner consistent with the home unit procedures.

Promotion and Tenure Recommendations

Budgeted Joint Appointments

The recommended guidelines for promotion and tenure review procedures parallel those of the third-year review.  The designated home unit has the primary responsibility for initiating and overseeing the review process, but the review should involve the participation and represent the views of all appointing units.  In developing their assessment, units must cooperate in securing external evaluations.  Internally, the units may use their respective regular procedures for promotion reviews, or the units may construct an ad hoc joint review procedure that uses a committee comprised of members from all appointing units and jointly charged by the executive officers.

The appointing units then make their recommendations to the dean(s), jointly if they are in agreement and separately if they are not.  Every effort should be made to come to a joint position by all units taking account of each other’s assessments.  If there is a recommendation for promotion, or for promotion and the awarding of indefinite tenure, the designated home unit will have the primary responsibility for preparing the dossier, in consultation with and representing the views of all appointing units.  A joint recommendation to the dean(s) will be signed by all executive officers of the appointing units and will report the separate votes of the review committees in each unit. The final section of the dossier, “Special Comments by the Unit Executive Officer,” may take the form of individual statements prepared by each executive officer or a joint statement prepared collaboratively by the executive officers.  In either case, authorship of the section must be clearly identified.

If the units making the recommendation are housed in different colleges, their recommendation must be acted on separately by each college following its normal procedures for promotion and tenure recommendations.

The dean’s letter of transmission to the Provost should be attached to the promotion dossier.  If the faculty is appointed in different colleges, the deans should write a joint letter of transmission.  The letter should address any substantive difference of opinion among the appointing units and/or colleges.

Faculty Member with Single Unit Appointment Engaged in an Interdisciplinary Scholarship Area

The recommended guidelines for promotion and tenure review procedures parallel those of the third-year review.  The appointing unit has the primary responsibility for initiating and overseeing the review process.  If agreed by the executive officer of the appointing unit and the faculty member, the review could involve the participation of, and could represent the views of, the appointing unit and the agreeing units.  All documents should make the respective source of contributing evaluations clear.  In developing their assessment, units may cooperate in securing external evaluations.  Internally, the appointing unit may construct an initial ad hoc review arrangement involving the agreeing units with attention to recommendations and concerns of the faculty member under review.  The recommendation of the ad hoc arrangement should be incorporated into the regular procedures for promotion reviews in the appointing unit.  Alternatively, one or two outside members may be incorporated into the regular review committee of the appointing unit with or without outside members having a formal vote depending upon unit by-laws.

The appointing unit then makes its recommendation to the executive officer of the next higher unit.  If there is a recommendation for promotion, or for promotion and the awarding of indefinite tenure, the appointing unit will have the responsibility for preparing the dossier, in consultation with, and representing the views of, the appointing unit and agreeing units.  A recommendation to the higher unit executive officer will be signed by the executive officer of the appointing unit and will report the votes of the review committees in the unit.  The final section of the dossier, “Special Comments by the Unit Executive Officer,” should take the form of an individual statement prepared by the appointing unit executive officer indicating the participation of the agreeing units.

Leaves

Budgeted Joint Appointments

Each appointing unit will review for eligibility and approval and request for a leave, e.g., sabbatical, educational, or personal, unless that approval has been delegated to the designated home unit.

Faculty Member with Single Unit Appointment Engaged in an Interdisciplinary Scholarship area

The appointing unit will review for eligibility and approval, any request for a leave, e.g., sabbatical, educational, or personal.  Where the interdisciplinary or collaborative teaching may be impacted, relevant executive officers should be consulted by the faculty member prior to formally requesting a leave. Any concerns of the executive officers consulted should be discussed with the executive officer in the appointing unit and the faculty member.

Assistance

Questions regarding this policy should be addressed to the Office of the Provost, 333-6677.