‘The Fit’s Not Right’

As someone who left a tenure-track appointment because of not “fitting” (to put it mildly) ten years ago, the one comment I can offer is that leaving the department was the best choice I ever made, even if the choice was not easy. I did not have to leave; I could have stayed – but the problem of fit is a very real one, and the academic structures of universities, especially in small departments, leave people very little room to maneuver when there are serious problems and disagreements. What I have lost in wages as a result of working as an instructor (same school, different department) rather than as a professor would not have begun to pay for the therapy I would no doubt have required had I chosen to stay in my original job. The rules and regulations at the university would have protected me insofar as being able to keep my job – but those rules and regulations had no power to change the climate of the department in which I would have been spending the next decades of my life. So, in sum, I have a great deal of sympathy for new hires who find themselves in
such a situation and, at least in my own case, I can say that it is
indeed sometimes preferable to pack up and move on. I am very grateful to the administrators at my college who hired me for a different position that has allowed me to pursue my talents and goals as a teacher in a way that never would have been possible in my first appointment.

Wouldn’t this be a good time, as a new semester dawns, for Prof Hacker to begin a diiscussion of “fit” between students and faculty members?  I often have students in my undergraduate classes who seem a poor “fit” for the course that I am teaching–either a poor fit to the subject matter or a poor fit to the way I have structured the course or, occasionally, a poor fit to me.  Even though my syllabus is quite explicit about assignments, grading procedures, the importance of taking notes, my availability for office visits or email communications, etc., I find that among the student end-of-semester student evaulations I receive (most of which are favorable, for which I am grateful) a number are from students who, as we approach the end of the course, plainly didn’t find a “good fit.”   How can we do a better job at the beginning of the semester addressing issues of “fit” for our undergraduate students, so that they and we can either fit better or agree not to try to fit at all? 

This is a really good point. The subject matter is a more difficult issue, but I’ve started my syllabi (and discussed in the first class) how we will proceed and raised the question of whether students will like these methods or not. It seemed to work last semester (the first time I tried it) quite well. Some students left after that class. And I had only one leave after the first four weeks. Those who stayed seemed content. More important, all of the students produced acceptable work in their final papers. Within that group, of course, some “fit” better than others, but there were no cases of terrible fit. It was a small class, however. I’m less certain this will work in a large class. We’ll see! I’m scheduled to teach one next semester.

Thanks, Bill.  These definitions are useful.  I would hope that institutions and individuals could use them and remain clearheaded when thinking about issues of “fit.”  Unfortunately, it seems, a lot of people use emotions or personality (loosely defined) as evidence of “good fit.” 

Thanks, 5768.  I appreciate your comments very much, as issues and questions of “fit” seem to be so arbitrary and with unwritten / unstated meanings.  (See Bill Hart-Davidson’s comments above for smart definitions of the term.)

Fit is hard to define, as several others have noted, and it’s just as hard to determine early in your appointment for yourself as it is for a committee or department to verbalize prior to beginning a search.

For new hires, particularly fresh PhDs, here’s my advice: find a way to fit if you like the department. How do you know if you like the department? Get out there and talk with your colleagues.  Ask for time on their dockets.  Ask for a quick cup of coffee at one of the campus (or close to campus) hot spots.  Get to know them professionally.

Hopefully you checked them out a little before applying.  I admit that I didn’t do that when I applied for my first job–I didn’t really think I’d get an interview, so I wasn’t that worried about it.  I knew the college had a strong reputation in the region, and that was all that mattered.  (And they were hiring in my area of specialization.)  When I got a phone interview, I did a little quick study.  They seemed okay.  When I got a campus interview, I did a lot more studying, and I could see the cracks in the veneer, but it still seemed okay–every department has those little elements that need to be tweaked and redefined, after all.  When I took the job, I found that finding my “fit” was going to be harder than it seemed at first.

I was not just a new hire, but I was really young–in a department of mostly older faculty.  The younger faculty that had worked to bring in the new hires (I was one of five) were very supportive, but I was separated from most of the hiring committee by being on a different campus.  I huddled in my office during my lunch break (at 2 in the afternoon, all five days of the week) and just tried to stay afloat the first semester.  Finally someone asked me to sit down and eat one day in the faculty lunch area–I was warming up some Ramen noodle concoction to take back to my lair.  I agreed, and I found that “fit” with this group of faculty who were all just hanging out.  Most were finished teaching for the day and just having a cup of coffee–the one who invited me was also in my department.  

Getting to know people outside of committees is essential.  You don’t see one another enough during department meetings to get to know them or for them to get to know you.  And committees are always busy with the business of the group.  These are great places for the department to get to see your professional candor, to see if you “fit” that way–and a great place for you to see the claws and dark ugliness of the department, if there is any, to see if you want to “fit” here.  But you have to take the time to make connections with the faculty.  You may be the only one interested in the research aspects you’ve chosen–but that may be exactly why they wanted to bring you in.  Find ways to contribute to the culture of the department, the knowledge base of the department, and to the college as a whole–if you give it a go for a couple of years and find you don’t like trying to fit there, or just really can’t find a place to fit, start looking for something else.  But don’t wait for someone to point out a good fit for you in the department–carve it out for yourself.

Fit in a  square peg but not in a round hele – most often heard on the campus and corporate enterprise today. My experience with piloting a program is always fraught with big risks. The result is always transparent

* Our new colleagues need to be collegial. This policy began long before I was hired and we have a department where everyone is at least polite to each other and several are good friends off campus. They need to be socially adept enough to attend social events without causing problems. They need to be willing to work at a regional university where a lot of our students are first-generation.
* The search committee screens for fit but the whole department is invited to meet the candidates in various aspects of the interviews (formal and informal). One candidate who made it to the campus interview lost out because he kept referring to one of our scholars as Mrs. instead of Dr.
* The candidate should know that we are not a Research I institution. We do have high expectations for scholarly output, but we will spend most of our time teaching. Most of our students will be ill-prepared for college and our job is to help them make it, not to weed them out. The new hire will be expected to spend most of the first year working on teaching, and the rest of the time will be spent getting the first article out. They should expect not to have any kind of social life off-campus for at least the first year. If this description is not applicable to them, they do not fit us.
* The department should know the teaching background of the new hire and how much mentoring they need (and will accept). The department needs to know the research agenda and keep track of how it is progressing. The department needs to observe warning signs of non-fit, such as non-attendance at department meetings or social gatherings, depression, etc., and react quickly.
* If a fit problem arises, the new faculty should talk to other newer members of the department as well as to the chair to see if the problem is resolvable. The department chair should be on top of the situation to mentor or assign mentors quickly.

Some institutions have ombudsmen or other senior faculty who are assigned the duties of helping new faculty adjust. The new faculty should seek these out early on.

Last piece of advice – communicate! If there is a perceived problem from either side, talk about it. That moody senior professor may be moody with everyone; the new hire may not know how to check their email to find out about department meetings. Do not assume the worst; ask!

Although I carped about a past experience a while ago (above) I should answer the posed questions from my current position.  I believe most departments have these perspectives, i.e., “fit” is defined programmatically, not so much behaviorally.

* What does it mean to “fit” in your department (group, school, college, or university)? –The word never comes up in the hiring process aside from program needs. Our expectations are standard, e.g., that the per new hire will perform the requisite duties and responsibilities in a professional and timely manner, as per his/her “fit” within our program and university.  We presume everyone knows how to behave personally and professionally, unless proving otherwise in the interview process.

*Who is responsible for defining “fit” in your department (group, school, college, or university)? — Although we do not use the term, the department faculty almost always address the programmatic needs and, unless there are extreme negatives, rarely considers behavior or personality.  Of course, we are more favorable to the pleasant and cooperative candidates, although we hope they think for themselves as well. Diversity of personalities is welcomed.

*In your department, who holds responsibility for ensuring a good
fit?  (a new hire, for example, a search committee, the department
chair)? — Standard process of department faculty defining what is needed, what type of professional fits best within the stated needs. We do not spell out behavioral traits–personal politics, religion, sexuality, etc. are never mentioned or used.

*What should a new hire know about fit before joining a department? — The program and university first and foremost, i.e., whether he/she is suitable for providing teaching, research, service, and leadership contributions that are needed. Also, I believe the candidate should understand the students in general, e.g., generational considerations and regional education concerns (such as public school prep for higher education).  This may be important in teaching success.*What should a department know about fit before hiring a new employee? — What the candidates expect, e.g., teaching load and levels, research support, facilities, policies and practices, etc.  These should be clarified in the interview process, obviously.What should a new hire or a department continue to understand about fit? — Flexibility–how to adapt to surprises, such as student performance and expectations. This goes for both the new hire (especially) and the department.If problems of fit arise, what should a new hire do? — Talk to the chair and the dean, the first lines of supervision and counseling. What should the department do if problems of fit arise? — The chair must discuss pending and in-process problems of any kind, particularly faculty concern, immediately and work with the new hire for resolution.  Easy to state, but too often displeasures and tensions fester into ugly and unprofessionally arrogant discord recriminations on both sides. The chair must the adult in such squabbles.Other advice? — Department chairs have the first line responsibility of maintaining programmatic and political order, yet too often timidity stalls action and greater damage ensures.