next »

[totoro]

Are there cases where the search committee actually has a candidate for the job already, but they have to do the search anyway because the administration requires it?
For example, does that ever happen in spousal-hire situations?

When you have an international faculty member who's moving towards Permanent Resident status ("green card") from work-permit status, you usually have to do a "Perm Search" to determine if the international person is the best for the job.  This requirement makes a mockery of two things:  1) that you're not supposed to discriminate against people on the basis of national origin, which you are de facto doing by having someone who's already won a legitimate search go through another one to defend his/her job; and 2) that you should only advertise jobs that actually exist.

I would find it exceedingly difficult to stomach displacing a perfectly acceptable international colleague due to a stupid, pointless immigration rule.  It's unfair to the person who got the job fair and square in the first place.  At the same time, the rule effectively forces a sham search.  It's terrible in every way.

Not sure how that works - I got tenure before I got the green card (and never got the green card as I then quit). Is this a new rule?

When I applied for the green card the department submitted the materials from my original hiring to show that I was better than an American candidates who applied.

[oldfullprof]

Hard to believe.

[mended_drum]

May I ask another question of SCC members related to this thread's topic?  I suspect that this may be highly idiosyncratic and vary between institutions and states, but how does "diversity" factor into decisions, if at all?

I seem to recall reading or hearing once (don't remember where or when) about a scenario like this: there are two final candidates of roughly equal "acceptability".  The SC recommends one, department votes, send recommendation to the dean.  However, dean or admin might look at that vote, and if, say, candidate #2 is from an underrepresented group, come back and want to recommend #2.  Is this an accurate or realistic scenario?  Or does it just not really factor in to final decisions?

In my department, if the candidates were otherwise equal, the dean would not need to do such a thing because we would probably select the member of the underrepresented group.  It's very difficult to recruit members of some groups to our part of the country and to our medium-sized city.  So far, in our specific department, they have always turned us down to go to larger, more diverse cities.  Other departments, however, have done much better, and are now sufficiently diverse that the dean would not overrule the department's choice, whatever it would be.

In fact, I can't think of a single instance in which our dean has overruled the will of a search committee at my SLAC.  There was one search where the dean told the committee before the vote that a candidate was not acceptable (for very good reason), but that's it.

[imawakenow]

I seem to recall reading or hearing once (don't remember where or when) about a scenario like this: there are two final candidates of roughly equal "acceptability".

I served on a SC as a graduate student representative. As part of the SC orientation the AA/EEO representative explicitly stated that the "tie goes to the member of the underrepresented group." It didn't come into play on that search.

At my current institution, I have served on two searches. The EEO office here has mostly focused on ensuring a fair search and a "diverse pool" of candidates.

[goingbatty]

To make the scenario a little more interesting: what if the candidate from an underrepresented group is ranked second? (A close second.)

[msparticularity]

To make the scenario a little more interesting: what if the candidate from an underrepresented group is ranked second? (A close second.)

In this case, it would probably depend upon the reasons for the rankings, as well as the actual qualifications for the position. If the second-place ranking were based upon fairly abstract things like institutional pedigree (for the PhD) and/or number of pubs, but the candidate from the underrepresented group were actually a better match for the position and/or the needs of the department/college in areas having to do with representation for underrepresented groups (scholarship and/or teaching experience in areas related to underrepresented groups)  then there would be reason to reconsider how those rankings had been set.

I have also known at least one dean who would very definitely step in and ask those questions in that situation.

[imawakenow]

To make the scenario a little more interesting: what if the candidate from an underrepresented group is ranked second? (A close second.)

If this is a topic that interests you, I suggest that a) you look in the archives as this topic has been discussed before and/or b) you start your own thread on whatever it is that you are trying to get at.

[ruralguy]

Our last Dean (at a SLAC) overruled several search committees.

Connecting to another thread, he didn't like it that too many departments were picking underqualified VAPs instead of
better qualified candidates with more research (in particular) under their belts.

He overruled giving the job to a VAP who was loved by some, and not so highly regarded by others.

As a side note, the guy who got the offer left after about 2 years, and its been difficult replacing him.
He was the second person to leave that dept in the last several years.

[goingbatty]

To make the scenario a little more interesting: what if the candidate from an underrepresented group is ranked second? (A close second.)

If this is a topic that interests you, I suggest that a) you look in the archives as this topic has been discussed before and/or b) you start your own thread on whatever it is that you are trying to get at.

The only thing I'm trying to "get at" is grasping at straws about my own situation.  I'm the "diversity" candidate in a search, and I'm fantasizing that somehow it will save me.  "What if it's a tie?  What if I'm a close second?  What could possibly make them choose me?"  If they were going to choose me they would have done so by now, but hey, a girl can dream.  I certainly don't think these questions are off the topic of the thread, as they are all factors that might affect which candidate is chosen.

[imawakenow]

The only thing I'm trying to "get at" is grasping at straws about my own situation.  I'm the "diversity" candidate in a search, and I'm fantasizing that somehow it will save me.  "What if it's a tie?  What if I'm a close second?  What could possibly make them choose me?"  If they were going to choose me they would have done so by now, but hey, a girl can dream.  I certainly don't think these questions are off the topic of the thread, as they are all factors that might affect which candidate is chosen.

Once again, if you have questions or would like advice or feedback regarding your situation or situations related to how diversity is handled or has been handled in other searches, I suggest starting a thread on the topic as you're likely to attract more responses.

Otherwise, good luck on your job search. I hope you receive an offer.

[goingbatty]

The only thing I'm trying to "get at" is grasping at straws about my own situation.  I'm the "diversity" candidate in a search, and I'm fantasizing that somehow it will save me.  "What if it's a tie?  What if I'm a close second?  What could possibly make them choose me?"  If they were going to choose me they would have done so by now, but hey, a girl can dream.  I certainly don't think these questions are off the topic of the thread, as they are all factors that might affect which candidate is chosen.

Once again, if you have questions or would like advice or feedback regarding your situation or situations related to how diversity is handled or has been handled in other searches, I suggest starting a thread on the topic as you're likely to attract more responses.

Otherwise, good luck on your job search. I hope you receive an offer.

Thanks -- I'm extremely fortunate in that I have a really strong non-academic job option, but even dipping my toe in this pool is both exhilarating and terrifying.  I have tremendous sympathy for those whose livelihood is resting on getting a TT job in this market.

[losemygrip]

I like some of the funny responses in this thread. 

In the places I've worked, the search committees and department chair merely made recommendations, and the deans and/or presidents did the hiring.  Of course, they typically did whatever was recommended.  At my present institution the dean has in the past (before my time) rejected the department's recommendation (and rightly so from what I can tell in retrospect).

I'm the dept. chair and I usually participate in the entire search process so that I can understand the committee's reasoning (and also make sure nobody's making some horrific EEO faux pas).  We talk some informally after each candidate, but right after the last one leaves, we sit down and ask everybody if they have a favorite and why; what are the various pros and cons; what does the dean think (I usually check with him before then--sometimes he gets amazing information from the candidates that we don't); what did the students say; etc.  In some difficult cases we may call references with specific questions to help us make up our minds.  At my smaller department the whole faculty usually participated in the search and voted.  In my current large dept., none of them bother to come to candidate presentations, so it's just me and the committee.  We try to come to consensus together.  At small school, we just sent a form up to the administration, which had to be approved by the Affirmative Action office first, then on up the line, then the dean called with the offer.  At large school, the committee chairs writes an evaluation of all finalists, sends it to me and the dean.  I write a separate evaluation, copy the committee and dean. The dean decides, but has me call with the offer. 

I have once disagreed with the committee, and the dean agreed with me.  Otherwise, it's always been unanimous (or at least general consensus).   

I have many times been the one to inform the inside candidate s/he did not get the job.  Reactions ranged from handshakes to tears and sobs.  (At first I felt sorry for that latter case, but then thought, "How could s/he have not known that this was at least a possibility and prepared for it?"  I became a little disgusted.)  In fact, I don't think I've ever participated in a search where the internal candidate won out.  I am EXTREMELY careful to evaluate all candidates based on the same criteria, and do not allow talk of "But they're already familiar with our students," and "We won't have to break him/her in." 

May I ask another question of SCC members related to this thread's topic?  I suspect that this may be highly idiosyncratic and vary between institutions and states, but how does "diversity" factor into decisions, if at all?

I seem to recall reading or hearing once (don't remember where or when) about a scenario like this: there are two final candidates of roughly equal "acceptability".  The SC recommends one, department votes, send recommendation to the dean.  However, dean or admin might look at that vote, and if, say, candidate #2 is from an underrepresented group, come back and want to recommend #2.  Is this an accurate or realistic scenario?  Or does it just not really factor in to final decisions?

At my small school, we had a kick-ass affirmative action person who carefully reviewed all searches.  In a case like this, we would be asked to provide a detailed written explanation of why we did not hire the protected-class candidate since they were almost identically qualified.  This was important backup in case of a later complaint.  If the explanation didn't hold water, she would bring it to the president's attention and the entire search could be endangered (and I believe this to be the correct course of action--you can't be too careful.)  But as long as you could outline why candidate #1 prevailed (presentation showed superior speaking skills, interview revealed deeper knowledge of secondary field, etc.), no problem. 

In my current institution there is NO oversight.  A new diversity officer tried to introduce some order and oversight into the process and was literally driven from her office.  So the above situation would never occur here (and it's just a matter of time until a nasty and expensive lawsuit).

[janedoesmith]

Hi everyone -

I am one of four finalists for two TT positions at a CC. The other three are all ICs. I'm rather certain the job description for this so-called national search was written for one of the ICs. So, one position down, one to go. What about the other position? Would they really hire another IC for what they say was a national search? It's been two weeks since my campus interview with VP. Oh, and I never filled in the paperwork I was told that would be required during my first campus visit with the SC (background search). And I never received a campus tour. I feel as if I was brought in to round out the finalist group. Lastly, I have an M.A. and a Ph.D. from a large public research institution while the ICs have an M.F.A. or less. This is the first full-time TT job I've applied for and the whole process is both exciting and excruciating. As I mentioned, it's been two weeks since my last interview... they did say two weeks... but nada. Any thoughts? Oh, I usually ask if there is an internal candidate, but was blindsided by knowing one of the individuals on the SC.

[profuniv]

So there are lots of different protocols for this I suppose. Do any of these protocols take more than 3 weeks for the candidate of first choice? Especially if graduation/final exam week were near the interview date.

[systeme_d_]

Hi everyone -

I am one of four finalists for two TT positions at a CC. The other three are all ICs. I'm rather certain the job description for this so-called national search was written for one of the ICs. So, one position down, one to go. What about the other position? Would they really hire another IC for what they say was a national search? It's been two weeks since my campus interview with VP. Oh, and I never filled in the paperwork I was told that would be required during my first campus visit with the SC (background search). And I never received a campus tour. I feel as if I was brought in to round out the finalist group. Lastly, I have an M.A. and a Ph.D. from a large public research institution while the ICs have an M.F.A. or less. This is the first full-time TT job I've applied for and the whole process is both exciting and excruciating. As I mentioned, it's been two weeks since my last interview... they did say two weeks... but nada. Any thoughts? Oh, I usually ask if there is an internal candidate, but was blindsided by knowing one of the individuals on the SC.

For goodness' sake, it's only been two weeks. 
You have my permission to start obsessing about this when three months have passed.  No sooner.