Damani K. White-Lewis, KerryAnn O’Meara, Kiernan Mathews, Nicholas Havey
{"title":"研究型大学教职员工的还价:谁能得到,谁不能,以及产生还价的因素是什么?","authors":"Damani K. White-Lewis, KerryAnn O’Meara, Kiernan Mathews, Nicholas Havey","doi":"10.1007/s10734-024-01234-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In US higher education, faculty members may receive an outside offer of employment from an external organization, and then receive a corresponding counteroffer from their current institution. Counteroffers are written contracts made to individuals — either prematurely in anticipation of an outside offer, but most often after an outside offer — that outline improved salary, benefits, and/or other employment conditions with the hopes of retaining them. Though the norm of the “retention offer” is pervasive in the academy, in practice it can be much more nebulous, inefficient, discretionary, and inequitable. Few studies, however, empirically examine this process. In this study, we analyze quantitative institutional and survey data collected from 650 faculty by the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education (COACHE) to explore whether certain populations of faculty are more likely to receive counteroffers, and why. We found that women and racially minoritized scholars were less likely to receive counteroffers, and identified other factors that impact reception of counteroffers like faculty members’ desire to leave and their notification of leadership. We conclude by situating findings within extant research and offering implications for future research on counteroffers and their practice in faculty retention.</p>","PeriodicalId":48383,"journal":{"name":"Higher Education","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Counteroffers for faculty at research universities: who gets them, who doesn’t, and what factors produce them?\",\"authors\":\"Damani K. White-Lewis, KerryAnn O’Meara, Kiernan Mathews, Nicholas Havey\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10734-024-01234-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In US higher education, faculty members may receive an outside offer of employment from an external organization, and then receive a corresponding counteroffer from their current institution. Counteroffers are written contracts made to individuals — either prematurely in anticipation of an outside offer, but most often after an outside offer — that outline improved salary, benefits, and/or other employment conditions with the hopes of retaining them. Though the norm of the “retention offer” is pervasive in the academy, in practice it can be much more nebulous, inefficient, discretionary, and inequitable. Few studies, however, empirically examine this process. In this study, we analyze quantitative institutional and survey data collected from 650 faculty by the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education (COACHE) to explore whether certain populations of faculty are more likely to receive counteroffers, and why. We found that women and racially minoritized scholars were less likely to receive counteroffers, and identified other factors that impact reception of counteroffers like faculty members’ desire to leave and their notification of leadership. We conclude by situating findings within extant research and offering implications for future research on counteroffers and their practice in faculty retention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48383,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01234-w\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01234-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Counteroffers for faculty at research universities: who gets them, who doesn’t, and what factors produce them?
In US higher education, faculty members may receive an outside offer of employment from an external organization, and then receive a corresponding counteroffer from their current institution. Counteroffers are written contracts made to individuals — either prematurely in anticipation of an outside offer, but most often after an outside offer — that outline improved salary, benefits, and/or other employment conditions with the hopes of retaining them. Though the norm of the “retention offer” is pervasive in the academy, in practice it can be much more nebulous, inefficient, discretionary, and inequitable. Few studies, however, empirically examine this process. In this study, we analyze quantitative institutional and survey data collected from 650 faculty by the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education (COACHE) to explore whether certain populations of faculty are more likely to receive counteroffers, and why. We found that women and racially minoritized scholars were less likely to receive counteroffers, and identified other factors that impact reception of counteroffers like faculty members’ desire to leave and their notification of leadership. We conclude by situating findings within extant research and offering implications for future research on counteroffers and their practice in faculty retention.
期刊介绍:
Higher Education is recognised as the leading international journal of Higher Education studies, publishing twelve separate numbers each year. Since its establishment in 1972, Higher Education has followed educational developments throughout the world in universities, polytechnics, colleges, and vocational and education institutions. It has actively endeavoured to report on developments in both public and private Higher Education sectors. Contributions have come from leading scholars from different countries while articles have tackled the problems of teachers as well as students, and of planners as well as administrators.
While each Higher Education system has its own distinctive features, common problems and issues are shared internationally by researchers, teachers and institutional leaders. Higher Education offers opportunities for exchange of research results, experience and insights, and provides a forum for ongoing discussion between experts.
Higher Education publishes authoritative overview articles, comparative studies and analyses of particular problems or issues. All contributions are peer reviewed.