The Notorious Business Professor
Steve is one of eight professors in the business school at a large, public university. His job responsibilities include teaching two classes per semester, developing a management research program, and advising and developing PhD candidates. He has been at the school for five years and has worked extremely hard to get tenure. Student ratings of his undergraduate classes are fairly solid; most students rated Steve as being an above average teacher in terms of their enjoyment, his level of knowledge, and his ability to stimulate critical thinking in class. Steve has already published several articles in some of the top management journals and has won several prestigious awards for outstanding research. Because of his research, Steve is on the fast track to becoming one of the top researchers in his field and already has a national reputation for his work. However, Steve has had a woeful track record with respect to developing and graduating PhD candidates. Steve has yet to be on a PhD dissertation committee or be an advisor to any PhD candidate in the program.
What Steve can do to improve his chances of being tenured: Case study #2?
The following analysis seeks to suggest some of the measures that Steve can take to improve his chances of getting the tenure. To get tenure one is required to observe professional ethics and satisfactorily complete a probation period which is prescribed as the full-time teaching for members of a faculty. Additionally, no administrator possesses the ability to waive the requirements of tenure (Best & Kneip, 2010). Steve has been working so hard to get the tenure. Despite this, there are some setbacks which may make him be excluded.
Statement of the problem
The problem is that during the five years Steve has been in the school, he has had a woeful track record. This is in respect to developing and graduating the Ph.D. students. There are also some complaints from the graduate students and many professors concerning his behavior. Further, his work schedule minimizes his contact with other people. Those seeking tenure are expected to work fulltime (Woods, 2006).
Causes of the problem
Steve’s problems may result from many factors. First, he believes that the Ph.D. students and the business school are not good enough despite the school having a national reputation for excellence. He also believes that only a few Ph.D. candidates are worth his attention. When the Ph.D. students were given seminar presentation to other professors and students, he would ask questions which made him look brilliant and others foolish and incompetent. He went through a competitive graduate program where individual efforts were more emphasized than collaborative and cooperative effort.
The decision criteria will be performance based. This requires one to deliver services otherwise the individual is excluded from consideration (GrecoFigueira & Ehrgott, 2016).
There are two possible solutions in this scenario. First, the Dean can choose to do away with the decision to help him improve his chances to get the tenure because he does not meet the general tenure requirements. He has also made the school to lose many candidates. Secondly, he can advise him on how he can improve his chances by observing professional ethics.
Steve should try to observe professional ethics. He should also practice full-time teaching during the remaining one year.