URC Perspectives on Faculty Incentives for Research

1
URC Perspectives on Faculty Incentives for
Research

• Jim Riviere, Chair URC

2
Incentives for Extramural Funding

• Identified as a critical issue by many members of
  URC
• Exacerbated by current budget crisis
• We are still in the discussion stage
• Goal is to foster dialogue

3
Why is this an issue?

• Many faculty hear the call for increasing
  extramural funding at NCSU and improving our
  national ranking
• Grant applications and management consume a great
  deal of professional time not directly related to
  research
• Presently, there are few if any NCSU incentives
  for faculty to be successful in this endeavor

4

• URC feels this is particularly acute with senior
  faculty where there are no automatic triggers
  for potential salary adjustments (e.g.
  promotions).
• The tails of the distribution of outstanding
  and under-performing faculty are covered by
  existing procedures
• Modus Operandi for super-stars is to get a
  competitive offer from another university and
  negotiate a better situation. RISKY!
• Post-tenure review covers under-performers

5

• Problem is with faculty five years beyond last
  promotion where no automatic reward system exists
• Sense of URC that investment in new research
  programs takes precedence over existing programs
• This is also tied to infrastructure needs of
  older faculty whose original equipment obtained
  in start-up packages is now vintage

6
Solutions?

• Institute positive incentives (e.g. salary
  increases) for outstanding post-tenure reviews
• This would require assuring post-tenure review is
  uniformly applied across all colleges
• Add additional steps for senior faculty
• Expand metrics of research productivity since
  level of extramural support is not sole indicator
  of successful research
• Publications, Editorships, Awards, etc.
• One faculty advocated negative salary incentives

7
Solutions Applicable to All Ranks

• Direct financial Incentives (e.g. of FA, of
  salary recovery) back to faculty
• Excellent review of pros and cons in January 23rd
  issue of SCIENCE
• Ranged from 3,000 to 30,000 / year / 100K base
  salary
• 80/125 surveyed US Medical Schools offer
  incentive
• Major negative is that approach targets research
  to sources paying FA at a detriment to some
  other mission oriented areas and overall academic
  value system

8

• Directed financial support (reduced FA,
  equipment, extra space) for specific hot
  faculty
• Reduced teaching loads
• Increase endowed professorships
• Increased research awards
• University Research Academy with financial
  incentive as long as faculty is a member of the
  academy

9
Conclusions

• If research enterprise is to grow, attention
  needs to be paid to a broadly applicable
  incentive program
• URC is focused on those areas that can help
  strengthen the research arena, fully realizing
  that there are other potential impacts of any
  such program
• Bottom line a research incentive program is
  required if we are to compete at the next level!

10
Day 1 Wrap Up

• See you in the AM