next »

[lucero]

I agree that "blah"is quite subjective and vague. Having worked outside of academia for over a decade, I find ALL of the faculty in my department to be "blah" in comparison to others much more dynamic that I've worked with, yet, I realize that my perspective is different and influenced by a world outside academia. I'm not on a tenure committee but if I were I wouldn't penalize someone because they are just not enthusiastic IF they actually met the minimum requirements for the component (teaching, service, research) or the components. That said, I'm not at the OP's school, nor do I know any of them, so I'm not saying that she is wrong or the one with the problem, but just my own opinion on it. In the end she, the faculty member in question and the rest of the tenure committee will be the ones who have to live with the decision that is made.

[seniorscholar]

Honestly, what I am most surprised about is that the OP's department has cleared articulate, well-defined requirements for tenure that are truly minimum requirements. The sense I get at most places with explicitly stated requirements is that they tend to be pitched a bit high, so that there is a bit of wiggle room.

This is also what I expect to see at a reuptable university. I have, however, heard of regional state schools and very small colleges with minimal research/teaching/service standards in the official document but an unstated -- or sometimes even very slyly stated -- clause on the order of "and the promise of continuing to be an asset  to the department." Or, in other words, "with these wonderful low standards, we can keep anyone we want to keep and get rid of the rest."

[hey_boo]

OP here.  Thanks.  This is truly the one time that internet advice I've received has been worth more than what I paid for it.  I admitted a few pages back that a department doesn't need spunky clones of each other.  A few people have pushed that idea further, saying that we should find ways for the person to (in their own blah subdued understated way) to make their mark. 

Fine advice.  I'll take it.  To be sure, there are plenty of tasks that this person could do that others aren't as excited about.  And after I took the weekend to think it over, I realize that they are in fact better at some service things that we aren't as good at.  For example, we get a decent number of non-traditional (read: older) students who transfer in from a regional community college.  They somehow gravitate towards this person, (maybe because they *gasp* don't like the pep that seems to work with the seventeen year-olds.) 

Moral of story: point taken.  Good advice.  Thanks.   

[larryc]

Good luck! Be open handed and generous in your congratulations to your newly-tenured colleague.

[oatmeal]

OP here.  Thanks.  This is truly the one time that internet advice I've received has been worth more than what I paid for it.  I admitted a few pages back that a department doesn't need spunky clones of each other.  A few people have pushed that idea further, saying that we should find ways for the person to (in their own blah subdued understated way) to make their mark. 

Fine advice.  I'll take it.  To be sure, there are plenty of tasks that this person could do that others aren't as excited about.  And after I took the weekend to think it over, I realize that they are in fact better at some service things that we aren't as good at.  For example, we get a decent number of non-traditional (read: older) students who transfer in from a regional community college.  They somehow gravitate towards this person, (maybe because they *gasp* don't like the pep that seems to work with the seventeen year-olds.) 

Moral of story: point taken.  Good advice.  Thanks.   

Thanks for the follow-up OP. Just make sure that your colleague is reviewed carefully and that there is good mentoring. Good luck.

[untenured]

Thanks for keeping us posted, hey_boo.  Hopefully this colleague will turn out acceptable to your department.

[alleyoxenfree]

Does anyone else get the feeling when they read this thread that this could be yourself, or almost anyone given a certain perspective or lens? Perhaps I'm being overly critical of my own TT progress, but the OP's original definition of this "blah. . .phlegmatic. . .lacking dynamism" person is really unclear?
I would like to ask for more specific examples of what makes someone 'blah,' other than the example of them lacking ambition and/or direction with service assignments (I mention this one because plenty of associate/full faculty in my department do their fair share of shirking or ignoring service needs).

Yes to this.  The unnecessarily pejorative characterization without examples leads me to think this person is just slightly different from a group of others.  For instance, one thing they seem extremely good at is knowing what the standards are, and meeting them.  This is a "conscientious" personality that studies show not only live the longest but are great at tasks requiring detail.  This is the person who should be your liaison with IRB and OSP, mastering the intricacies of those tasks where figuring out the to-do list and getting them done is crucial.  Same with accreditation reports. 

Every department needs a mix of personalities, and the group here may be bemoaning their low-enrollment status and looking for a reason - other than looking in the mirror.  Or perhaps their parties aren't fun enough because said person doesn't bring enough witty banter to the table.  Sooner or later, this department will suffer a crisis in which they are going to want a clear-eyed, steady "plodder" to pull them out of the fire.

The department could also spend some time thinking about how and why they were not significantly scintillating enough themselves to attract a more fiery candidate in the first place, and how to change themselves to change that next time around.

Finally, could it be that this person values balance in their life?  There are many junior faculty who are trying to balance a two-body problem, children, or an elderly relative, with the demands of the tenure track.  That they are conscientiously trying to meet those demands (if not living for work and soaring above) may mean they have mastered balance in their lives to a degree that others could learn from.

[ruralguy]

There's nothing that gets my goat more than folks who complain about faculty (or students) who are only meeting requirements for something. As someone else said, if you think the minimum is too little, then make the maximum the new minimum and make sure everybody lives up to that, or else. But being more realistic, if the guy gets stuff published and gets good evals, then he probably isn't quite as blah as you make out. As Larryc said, perhaps you just don't like him, his demeanor, or what he talks about in his spare time, or something. Now what you can also do is reserve the best awards and endowed professorships and such for the truely exceptional folks.
In that way, you do reward some folks who go beyond minimum or just happen to have exceptional talents, or both.

If you get rid of this guy, you could end up with someone a lot worse than blah.