The Ins and Outs of Faculty Recruiting
0 likes4,709 views
The document provides an overview of faculty recruiting trends and best practices based on AOM Placement Services data. It discusses applicant and job trends, the recruiting process, targeting candidates, interview dos and don'ts, campus visits, making job offers, and factors that influence candidate decisions. The key recommendations are to ensure an appropriate institutional "fit" for candidates, maintain clear and consistent communication, and avoid negative behaviors that could turn candidates away.
The Ins and Outs of Faculty Recruiting
- 1. The Ins and Outs of Faculty Recruiting Based on Materials From James Dulebohn La Verne Higgins Wendy Kramer Garry Adams Mike H. Ryan AOM Placement Services
- 2. How Faculty Initially Feel About Recruiting We can do this!
- 3. How Faculty Often Feel About Recruiting After the Interviews Run away!!!!!
- 4. Overview • Vital Statistics – What you want to know. • Applicant Survey Data – what you need to know. • The Process of Recruiting Prospective Faculty – At AOM – What we do. – In General – What you ought to be doing. • Questions Common to the Process.
- 5. Hiring Trends AACSB Study 2009-2010 from 510 US Institutions • Institution • Percentage – AACSB Accredited – 86.6% – Non – AACSB – 13.4% – Public – 67.3% – Private – 32.7%
- 6. 2012 AOM Placement • Applicants (2.65 applicants per job) – 2012 ‐ 948 • 2010 – 723 – 2009 – 676 » 2008 – 319 • Positions – 2012 – 358 • 2010 – 289 – 2009 – 260 » 2008 ‐ 172
- 7. Applicants Registered on AOM 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 Strategy 276 189 294 259 208 OB 291 177 286 288 187 HR 172 141 205 190 117 Int’l 166 99 284 44 98 Entrep. 162 142 173 166 143 OT 139 82 174 217 94
- 8. Managerial Jobs By Category (as of 2 August 2012) Job Type Year ‐ 2012 Applicant to Job Ratio Strategy 99 2.1 OB 76 2.46 HR 53 2.21 International 42 2.33 Entrepreneur 65 2.2 OT 30 3.13
- 9. Targeting Preferred Faculty Candidates Appropriate to Your Institution Miss Hit Do Not Select Potential Select Potential High High Performer: slow pub Performer: Pubs plus start, inexperienced teacher, pipeline, good teacher, and a and needs competent mentor. likely good colleague. Hit Miss Do Not Select Potential Select Potential Low Low Performer: great Performer: one hit school, good program, wonders, teaching ?able and competent advisor but…. probable poor colleague.
- 10. 2007 AOM Survey of Candidates (Nancy McIntyre and Mary Jo Jackson) • Sources Used During Job Search: – 75% interviewed at AOM – 11% interviewed elsewhere • Regional Meetings • Other Professional Organizations AMA etc. – 48% Chronicle of Higher Education – 26% Other • Higheredjob.com • School websites • Discipline websites and/or list serves
- 11. How did applicants determine with whom to interview? • Match in teaching preferences – 57% • Geographic Area – 50% • Reputation of Faculty – 31% • “Fit” – 50% Very Important for Everyone! – Institutional Fit vs. Candidate Fit • Different Criteria • Clarity of Expectations Critical – 1st Job Candidates vs. 2nd Job Candidates • Now that I know what I know, I want…. • Then, what you really want is….
- 12. Fit – Institutional Mating • Realistic Job Preview is Absolutely Critical. • Research Expectations: must be realistic and accurate for your institution in terms of outlets, #, quality etc. • Teaching Load: preps, scheduled hours/days, # of students per class, rigor, grade distributions etc. • Service Commitments: umbrella for your new faculty. • Role of Mentors: tenure, culture, student issues as well as teaching service and research. Not necessarily the same person for everything and not just the occasional lunch.
- 13. Interviewing Do’s • Provide specific information: – Your university – no institution is perfect. – Your position – needs versus wants. – Your hiring process – timelines and feedback. • Demonstrate genuine interest in the applicant. • Be candid about applicant prospects – be gentle toward non fits.
- 14. Helpful Hints • Contact recruits as early in the process as possible. • Early decisions often trump $ and other variables. • Avoid large panel interviews – do not trash candidates research. • Do not double book interviews. • Only interview real prospects.
- 15. More Helpful Hints • Do not use hotel rooms. • Do not interview in Placement Reception Areas or at Interview Tables which have not been assigned for your search. • If conducting interviews outside Placement area evaluate location and environment from applicant’s perspective.
- 16. Interview Hints • Realistically interview each applicant. – Don’t just market your school. – Don’t over market your school. • Concentrate on the applicant not on yourself! • Read applicant’s vita prior to interview. – We see many interviewers who have no idea who they are talking with. – We also see frequent confusion as to who spoke with whom about what. Notes can really help.
- 17. More Interview Hints • Plan for interviews. – Pay attention to your time constraints. – Be consistent in terms of questions etc. just like any good research effort. – As academics, we know how to do this right. • Do not photograph applicants. • Do not ask “illegal” questions.
- 18. Never…. • “I was interviewed by a recruiter who was drunk at 2:00 in the afternoon. I withdrew my application.” • “I was so struck by the hostility between the faculty conducting the interview I knew their institution was not my sort of place.” • “When I heard the recruiters making fun of the previous candidate I wondered what they would say about me?”
- 19. Interview Aftermath - minuses • Decreased Applicant Interest Due to: – Negativity • Hostile comments at interview. • Negative comments about colleagues, the institution, and competition. – Poor organization of the interview. – Any sense of being played or not treated as a serious candidate.
- 20. Interview Aftermath - pluses • Increased Applicant Interest Due to: – Message consistency – Faculty enthusiasm • For the position • For the institution – Insightful questions generate positive interest • But do try to distinguish between poor candidates and poor candidate preparation. • Recognize that some programs do a poor job of preparing their students. (Unpolished gems are still valuable.)
- 21. Campus Visits • Only invite candidates that are likely to be hired. • To get who or what you want be specific about your needs. • Be serious about tradeoffs your institution is actually willing to make. • Think investment rather than cost.
- 22. The Job Offer • Subject for Negotiation – Salary – AACSB, CUPA, AAUP, – Research support (81% provide some) – Number of courses/preps ‐ 42% get some release time – Travel – 94% get support for travel, networking still critical – Technology – 70‐80% some form of support, but do not promise and then fail to deliver – Summer Funding • 45% summer teaching • 71% summer research support
- 23. Salary Trends 2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010‐2011 2011‐2012 New PhD 101.8 105.7 112.3 100.1 Instructor 65.3 67.4 68.5 70 Assistant 103.1 104.4 108 106.8 Associate 84‐120 90‐125 Full 127‐150 127‐160
- 24. After the Job Offer • Give the candidate a deadline for responding. – Do not contact them every day or two for an answer. – Do not oversell your school. – Do not make promises you are not willing to put in writing. • Give the candidate contact information should questions arise during offer consideration.
- 25. Remember Candidate Decisions Will Be Influenced By • Geographic area. • Reputation of the school. • Collegiality of the faculty. • “Fit” perceived or real with the faculty. • Opinions of advisor, committee, family, friends and others. You can only do so much.
- 26. General Hints • Stay on schedule throughout the recruiting process. • Communicate effectively: – Follow-up with candidate, – Return phone calls, – Send regret letters out promptly. • Ask for reference letters only from final candidates. (This is a significant hiring barrier for some institutions and almost always sends the wrong signals to prospective candidates.)
- 27. AOM Placement is here to help • We want institutions to have successful hires. • We want prospective faculty to find positions that “fit” them. • We would like the process to be transparent to all involved. • We are committed to doing the best job possible for institutions and job candidates.