RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES FOR APPOINTMENT AND REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR FACULTY MEMBERS WITH BUDGETED JOINT APPOINTMENTS IN TWO OR MORE UNITS
Revised and Approved by the LAS Executive Committee, January 18, 1994
Revised and Approved by the LAS Executive Committee, October 28, 2020
These recommendations are intended to provide guidance to LAS units in the appointment and review of tenure-stream faculty members with joint appointments. They are based on principles of mutual cooperation, open sharing of views, and fairness to the faculty member. Further, as noted in the final report of the LAS 2012 Ad Hoc Committee on Joint Appointments, whose recommendations this policy reflects, "the success of multiple-line weight appointments hinges on whether they are designed appropriately and align the incentives and interests of the faculty and the university." While some procedures are therefore left to the choice of the units, this policy is meant to ensure that all relevant views are expressed at times of appointment and review, that effective communication is promoted between units and/or with the faculty member, and that a clear and orderly process is used for decisions affecting faculty members with joint appointments. This policy also aligns with the procedures set forth in on the Budgeted Joint Appointment of New Faculty Members.
Joint appointments are defined as those in which a tenure-stream faculty member's appointment and workload are allocated across two units on a percentage basis, normally in increments of 25%, though other configurations may be possible. Thus, a joint appointment on a split-line basis of 75/25 indicates that 75% of the faculty member's work is dedicated to one department, and 25% to the other. A 50/50 split-line appointment indicates that said faculty member carries equivalent workload expectations in the two units across which the appointment has been made. Such appointments are usually made, according to Provost Communication #23, for "faculty members whose scholarship bridges multiple disciplines." Faculty with 0% ("zero percent") appointments in one or more units, but a 100% appointment in another, are not covered under this policy. For more on zero percent appointments, see .
II. Initial Appointment
- For a tenure-track position at the assistant professor level, or a tenured position at the associate professor level, or any associate or full professor appointments without tenure (i.e., W and ), joint appointments should establish a substantial majority/minority split in design (e.g., 75/25). This is to ensure that assistant and associate professors, and any associate or full professors appointed without tenure, each have a primary unit as their tenure home, and so that EOs may assess and assign service and teaching duties accordingly. For a tenured position at the full professor level, appointments may be made on any split-line basis.
- To secure the initial appointment, the executive officers of the units involved must execute a joint letter to the Dean requesting the appointment. That letter must describe the terms of the appointment and the individual's responsibilities in each unit (i.e., instructional load, advising responsibilities, committee service, and any other specific unit-level obligations). This letter must then be used as the basis for a Memo of Understanding (MOU) outlining the terms of appointment, which must be signed by the faculty member, the executive officers of each department where the faculty member will be appointed, and the Dean. The Dean will transmit the final executed MOU to each unit's EO, and to the candidate.
- In the joint letter to the Dean requesting that an appointment be made, and in the subsequent MOU, the executive officers must designate the home unit. The designated home unit must have tenure-granting power and normally will be the unit with the largest percentage of the individual's appointment, or that represents the individual's primary discipline. The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review and the subsequent promotion and tenure reviews.
III. Annual Reviews
Provost Communication #21 states that “every tenured or tenure-track faculty member should be reviewed annually by her or his department through a process developed by the faculty of the department.” In the case of jointly appointed faculty, each unit may conduct its own annual review; however, the two units should share with each other the results of their review and confer about the report(s) to be issued. The units may send either separate reports or a joint report signed by both executive officers.
IV. Third-Year Review
The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review. The review will involve the participation of both units and will represent the views of both. Either of the following procedures may be used.
- Each unit may conduct its own review. The two units will share with each other the results of the two reviews and will confer about the report(s) to be issued. The units may send either separate reports or a joint report signed by both executive officers.
- The two units may conduct a joint review, with a committee including members from both units. The findings of the joint committee will be sent to both units for evaluation, and the two units will confer about the kind of report(s) to be issued. Depending on the final evaluations of the individual units, they may then prepare and send to the faculty member either a single joint report signed by both executive officers, or separate reports from each executive officer reflecting the distinctive views of each unit.
When separate reports are issued, they will be copied to the other appointing unit. When joint reports are issued, observations and recommendations that are relevant to one unit and not the other, or differences in assessment between units, should be articulated carefully so that the faculty member is informed of commonly held opinions and of any views that are important to each of the units separately.
V. Promotion and Tenure Decisions
The recommended guidelines for promotion and tenure review procedures parallel those of the third-year review. The designated home unit has the primary responsibility for initiating and overseeing the review process, but the review should involve the participation and represent the views of both units. In developing their assessment, units must cooperate in securing external evaluations. Internally they may use their own customary procedures for promotion reviews, or the two units may construct an ad hoc joint review procedure. Either of the following procedures may be used.
- Each unit may conduct its own review, the results of which will be shared with the jointly appointing unit.
- The two units may conduct a joint review with a committee including members from both units, whose findings will be sent to both units.
Both units will then make their recommendations to the Dean, jointly if they are in agreement and separately if they are not. If there is a recommendation for promotion, or for promotion and tenure, the designated home department will have the primary responsibility for preparing the case. A joint recommendation to the Dean will be signed by both executive officers.