Tenure-Track Policy

We will state clearly the Department’s tenure criteria (see later) in the open call. In its recruiting (and also retention, and development) of faculty, the Department embraces norms of equality and diversity and treats all faculty fairly and equally. We do not disadvantage candidates because of their ethnic background, gender, disability, religion, belief, sexual orientation, age, and so forth when we consider potential candidates. Of interest is how candidates can contribute meaningfully to the Department, the Business School, and the wider society. Yet, if for a position at any given level, two candidates are equally qualified, the Department will appoint the candidate of the gender currently underrepresented

In terms of candidates, as the Department has a strong commitment to excellence, distinctiveness, and relevance of its research and education, candidates, who wish to join us, need to demonstrate enthusiasm for working in a department of this type. Our dedicated faculty are curious and passionate, and they are free to develop their own research and education (when this is possible). Therefore, successful candidates should have:

1. A Ph.D. in marketing (or another relevant discipline) from a business school or university.
2. A professional proficiency in English (in writing and speaking). A professional proficiency in Danish (in writing and speaking) would be an advantage.
3. The ability to conduct high-quality research (demonstrated in their completed Ph.D. thesis and, preferably, journal publications at level AJG 3 or above. Publications in journals on the FT 50 list are particularly welcome).
4. The ability to conduct excellent teaching at the Bachelor and Master levels. Candidates need to demonstrate seriousness in their teaching and must adhere to academic integrity. They must be willing to engage in pedagogical initiatives that ensure students’ mastering of the subject taught. Furthermore, candidates must be willing to participate in department and business school-wide education activities.
5. The ability to complete CBS’ Assistant Professor Program (APP) that leads to a documented pedagogical qualification, and the willingness to engage in continuous pedagogical development.
6. The ability to plan, undertake, and report research, education, and service (e.g., administration and academic citizenship) activities effectively, efficiently, and on time.
7. The willingness to be an active citizen in the Department where a supportive and inclusive environment is top priority.
8. The dedication to develop dynamic leadership in research, education, and services.

After the deadline for applying for the tenure-track assistant professorship position, an internal committee will assess those applications that the Head of Department and another faculty member of the Department have shortlisted. The Head of Department will determine the set-up of the internal committee, which will consist of three faculty members from the Department and approved—through consultation—by the Academic Council. In case an internal candidate applies, at least one of the committee’s members will be from outside the Department.

With regard to both the shortlisting committee and the assessment committee, members will be at least on the level of associate professor, with both genders represented in the committees. Furthermore, the members’ individual profiles will reflect, if possible, the research topics of the shortlisted candidates. In case CBS faculty apply for a position, they will compete on equal terms with other applicants.

After the completion of the assessment, the Head of Department will consider the applications from candidates found qualified for the position. We will invite the most qualified candidate to visit our Department, to give a research seminar, and to meet individual faculty members one-to-one. When the outcome of a visit is successful for both parties, we will extend an offer for a tenure-track assistant professorship. At the start of the actual employment, we will assign two mentors (who will be relevant in terms of their research and education interests; it is very likely that one of the mentors also will be one of the tenure-track assistant professor’s two APP mentors) from the Department’s faculty to the tenure-track assistant professor. Furthermore, the tenure-track assistant professor will receive a copy of the Department’s tenure-track policy, which the Dean of Research has agreed with.

2. From Tenure-Track Assistant Professor to Associate Professor

As part of the tenure-track policy, each tenure-track assistant professor will go through a mid-term evaluation and (if the mid-term evaluation is positive) a final formal academic assessment for appointment as associate professor. The document discusses these two steps next and what happens if the tenure-track assistant professor is not successful (i.e., grace period).

2.1. Mid-Term Evaluation

In addition to the yearly performance development discussion with the Head of Department, a mid-term evaluation of the tenure-track assistant professor usually will take place three years into the appointment by an internal committee. The Head of Department will determine the set-up of this internal mid-term committee, which will consist of three faculty members from the Department. Faculty members who have mentored or coauthored / cofunded with the tenure-track professor cannot be appointed to the mid-term evaluation committee. This is to ensure that the mid-term evaluation is unbiased. Appointed faculty members must be at least on the level of associate professor, with both genders represented.

The main purposes of the mid-term evaluation is to help the tenure-track assistant professor assess progress towards tenure, as well as to provide advice on how to proceed in accordance to the department’s REEAD model. For the mid-term evaluation, the tenure-track assistant professor should therefore submit statements about intended activities (organized according to the REEAD model). The committee submits its written evaluation of the tenure-track professor’s achievements vis-à-vis the REEAD expectations.  

The committee’s overall conclusions of the evaluation go into the tenure-track assistant professor’ tenure package. With this information, the Head of Department then makes an overall recommendation using the following ‘scheme’:

1. Believes the candidate is making very good progress towards tenure.
2. Believes the candidate is making good progress towards tenure.
3. Believes the candidate is making some progress towards tenure.
4. Is concerned about the candidate’s lack of progress towards tenure.
5. Is very concerned about candidate’s lack of progress towards tenure.

When the outcome is ‘c’ or ‘d’, the tenure-track professor and the Head of Department will meet every six months to assess progress and—together with the two mentors—provide advice to the tenure-track professor. When the outcome is ‘e’, the Head of Department will consider issuing a formal warning and, in the first place, proceed as with outcomes ‘c’ and ‘d’.

2.2. Formal Academic Assessment for Appointment as Associate Professor

The formal academic assessment for appointment as associate professor normally takes place within the last six months of the appointment. In the case of tenure-track assistant professors having performed exceedingly well on the department’s REEAD model, the formal academic assessment can be undertaken earlier, though. Furthermore, if the tenure-track assistant professor takes parental leave during the tenure-track assistant professorship employment, the appointment is extended based on length of leave in accordance with current regulation. The tenure-track assistant professor can also apply for parental-leave boost.

When the indicative expectations to performance vis-à-vis the REEAD expectations have been met, the tenure-track assistant professor is responsible for requesting the formal academic assessment and must make this request at least six month prior to the expiration of the appointment. Tenure-track assistant professors must develop their tenure package in accordance with the requirements stipulated in the Department’s tenure policy. The tenure package should include a cover letter, a CV, a statement of research initiatives and developments, a publication list, selected works, coauthor statements, a statement of educational and pedagogical initiatives and developments, teaching evaluations, and statements in regards to completion of the APP (see later).

Subsequently, the department conducts a preliminary review of the tenure-track assistant professor’s prospect for tenure based on the tenure package. To aid the Head of Department, a tenure-review committee will be set up; this committee will reflect the tenure-track professor’s research topics. The Head of Department chairs this tenure-review committee. Faculty members who have mentored or coauthored/cofunded with the tenure-track professor cannot be appointed to the tenure-review committee. Appointed faculty members must be at least on the level of associate professor, with both genders represented. The tenure-review committee probably will seek input from other faculty in the Department; this input likely could be on the tenure-track professor’s academic citizenship. Furthermore, the tenure-track professor will do a research seminar for the Department’s faculty. The conclusions of the tenure review (i.e., the Head of Department’s recommendation) goes into the tenure-track assistant professor’s tenure package.

Following that, when setting up the assessment committee, the Head of Department will follow CBS’ policy for appointment of assessment committee. The assessment committee will have one internal faculty member (i.e., from the Department) who acts as chairman and two external, international members (at least one from outside the Nordic countries) where academically possible. The internal faculty member must not have mentored or coauthored/cofunded with the tenure-track professor; this faculty member also must not have been part of the tenure-review committee. Furthermore, the assessment committee will include the four professorial faculty members of CBS Wide Appointment Committee (CWAC), which appoints at least two of its professorial faculty members to conduct the CWAC interview. Finally, members of the assessment committee must be at least on the level of associate professor, with both genders represented.

Specifically, the assessment committee evaluates whether the tenure-track assistant professor is qualified for appointment as associate professor based on the Department’s tenure criteria. This assessment consists of two steps:

1. The field-specific assessors deliver a preliminary report with a recommendation regarding tenure.
2. The appointed professorial faculty members of CWAC conduct an interview with the tenure-track assistant professor followed by a hearing in CWAC. The conclusion of this hearing is added to the assessment, and CWAC thus finalizes the assessment report.  

A tenure-track assistant professor can only be found qualified for appointment as associate professor if both the preliminary report and CWAC recommend tenure. CWAC shall not conduct an interview if the preliminary report does not include a positive recommendation. If the formal academic assessment is positive, the tenure-track assistant professor is appointed as associate professor. If tenure-track assistant professors do not request to have their qualifications assessed within the last year of appointment, or if their assessment is not positive, CBS terminates the tenure-track employment in accordance with the collective agreement rules.

2.3. Grace Period

At the discretion of the Head of Department, the tenure-track assistant professor can be offered a grace period in the event of not qualifying for an associate professorship. Normally, the Head of Department will inform the tenure-track assistant professor at the beginning of the 6th year whether grace year will be offered. This grace period is usually a contract of up to 12 months duration. In the grace period, the former tenure-track assistant professor will have a teaching obligation similar to that of an assistant professor regardless of position offered. Finally, a grace period cannot lead to a new formal academic assessment within the tenure-track program. 

Appendix: Performance Expectations in Terms of the REEAD Model

Introduction

This appendix describes the Department’s expectations to tenure-track assistant professors’ performance vis-à-vis the Department’s REEAD model. Thus, the appendix serves as a guide for tenure-track assistant professors’ career development dialogue and input for the assessment committees. It is important to note that expectations are indicative. That is, although research, education, and service (e.g., administration and academic citizenship) are the main assessment criteria, the focus of assessment will be on the tenure-track assistant professor’s overall performance meaning that outstanding performance on one REEAD element may outweigh performance on another REEAD element when performance clearly is strong overall. Thus, the Department considers tenure-track professors holistically.

The tenure package should include a cover letter, a CV, a statement of research initiatives and developments, a publication list, selected works, coauthor statements, a statement of educational and pedagogical initiatives and developments, teaching evaluations, and statements in regards to completion of the APP some of which are discussed next.

1.1 CV

The CV should list at least the following information:

1. Full name.
2. Academic degrees (year, degree, institution, and supervisors).
3. Courses that are not part of any formal academic qualification (year, course, and institution).
4. Work experiences (year, employer, and type of work).
5. Visiting fellowships (year, institution, type of fellowship).
6. Collaborative projects with private and public organizations (year, organization, type of project).
7. Membership of learned societies and professional affiliations.
8. Awards and other honors including esteem factors.
9. Research initiatives and developments + publication list (see later; will constitute a separate document).
10. External research income streams (amount of external research income stream, as well as the role the tenure-track assistant professor played in the external research income stream).
11. Educational and pedagogical initiatives and developments + teaching evaluations + statements in regards to completion of the APP (see later; will constitute a separate document).
12. Services, for example, administration and academic citizenship. This discussion will constitute a short(er) description in a separate document.
13. Dissemination. This discussion will constitute a short(er) description in a separate document.
14. A copy of the mid-term evaluation.
15. Names of between three and five external faculty members who can provide letters of recommendations. The information should include full name and title of the faculty members and their affiliation and e-mail addresses.

1.2 Indicative Criteria for Research

Tenure-track assistant professors should discuss (3,000 words maximum) their research initiatives and developments during the tenure-track period. This normally would include a discussion of the tenure-track assistant professors’ research field, as well as the research project(s) that the tenure-track assistant professors have been involved in, and the research problem that the tenure-track assistant professors have investigated.

Tenure-track assistant professors should first discuss and document their research initiatives and developments and then list their publications, citations + h-index, and standing in the field organized after:

1. Published peer-reviewed articles in journals (using Journal of Marketing’s reference style).[1] A coauthor statement and the journal’s AJG classification (at the time that the article was accepted) should be added to each article. Also, the journal’s BFI classification and impact factor (at the time that the article was accepted) should be added.
2. Manuscripts currently in peer review with journals (with the same information as above + the stage in the reviewing process). Importantly, for manuscripts that are conditionally accepted, the acceptance letter should be added to the manuscript.  
3. Published research notes, editorials, and book reviews (using Journal of Marketing’s reference style).[2] The type of publication must be stated (i.e., research note, editorial, or book review).
4. Published monographs, anthologies, and textbooks, as well as book chapters in aforementioned outlets. A coauthor statement and the outlet’s BFI classification should be added to each outlet.
5. Published articles in newspapers and practitioner magazines.
6. Conference papers. The name of the conference should be added to each paper.
7. Citations and h-index (Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science).
8. Evidence of standing in the field (e.g., recognition, impact on academia, and impact on business and society).

The following are indicative minimum criteria for output in journals that the Department would expect tenure-track assistant professors to fulfill. That is, the assessment committee will base its assessment on the entire portfolio of research initiatives, developments, and outcomes, but the assessment committee will use the indicative research criteria as a guidance for acceptable levels of academic work.

Faculty in the Department are expected to publish in AJG-listed journals. For articles published in non-marketing journals, tenure-track assistant professors should explain the marketing component of such articles. Specifically, tenure-track assistant professors should fulfill all of the following criteria:

1. At least one peer-reviewed publication at level AJG 4 or above. This publication does not necessarily need to be included in the AJG’s list of marketing-classified journals.
2. At least one peer-reviewed publication in a journal at level AJG 3 or above and that is included in the AJG’s list of marketing-classified journals.
3. A total of at least 12 AJG points based on the point system below.

Points for peer-reviewed published articles in journals on the AJG list:

1. 8 points for an article published in an AJG 4* journal (this needs to be a proper peer-reviewed article, not a research note, editorial, book review, etc.).
2. 5 points for an article published in an AJG 4 journal (this needs to be a proper peer-reviewed article, not a research note, editorial, book review, etc.).
3. 3 points for an article published in an AJG 3 journal (this needs to be a proper peer-reviewed article, not a research note, editorial, book review, etc.).

It should be noted, again, that even if a tenure-track professor accumulates a total of 12 or more AJG points, this does not mean that the candidate then has fulfilled the criteria for an associate professorship. As discussed, the Department considers holistically the candidate’s achievements of all REEAD elements.

Although article points and journal categorizations normally are based on the AJG version at the time when an article was accepted for publication, we might consider positively—in case of a doubtful tenure-track case—a journal that has increased its ranking.

Published articles in journals at the AJG 1 and 2 levels render no points. The same is normally the case for monographs, anthologies, textbooks, published articles in newspapers and practitioner magazines, and conference papers. This is also normally the case for any revise-and-resubmits to AJG 3, 4, or 4* journals (except when a revise-and-resubmit is a conditional acceptance or very close to a conditional acceptance). Still, all such output will be taken into account as a positive signal regarding broader contribution to knowledge exchange, maintenance and development of academic communities, etc.

In those cases where articles in non-AJG journals are submitted, tenure-track assistant professors need to explain why the articles were published in such journals, and why those journals are of similar quality and relevance as journals at level AJG 3, 4, or 4*.

In terms of the number of authors on an article, the Department employs no particular system to adjust the above point system. In general, collaboration is encouraged. Thus, a reduction of points will only be made if the number of authors is unusually high, or if the author team composition in other ways gives reason to doubt the ability of the tenure-track assistant professor to work independently. When authors do not appear in alphabetical order, or when the tenure-track assistant professor is not listed as first author, a coauthor statement is especially important. Presence of single-authored or ‘lead-authored’ articles (simply having an article as the first in a given journal issue does not constitute a ‘lead-authored’ article, though) is a positive signal.

Publications prior to receiving the offer for the tenure-track assistant professorship employment do not necessarily reduce expectations to research output during the six-year track (as we want to ensure that tenure-track assistant professors can produce a certain output over time), but are considered positive signals.

1.3 Indicative Criteria for Education

Tenure-track assistant professors should discuss (3,000 words maximum) their educational and pedagogical initiatives and developments during the tenure-track period. This normally would also include a discussion of the tenure-track assistant professors’ teaching evaluations, as well as a statement in regards to completion of the APP.

The following are indicative minimum criteria for educational and pedagogical initiatives, developments, and outcomes:

1. Having completed the APP or, alternatively, having a comparable pedagogical education development program at a satisfactory level from a respected business school or university.
2. Having obtained teaching outcomes commensurate to CBS standards.

We note that an assessment of educational and pedagogical initiatives, developments, and outcomes always should reflect the broader feedback and an overall consideration. In particular, the following factors should be taken into account:

1. Positive development: The tenure-track assistant professor is a position, which involves pedagogical training and development. We cannot expect newly hired tenure-track assistant professors to be excellent educators, but they should strive to become so. As such, a positive development over time in educational and pedagogical initiatives, developments, and outcomes is more important than initial ones.
2. Flexibility and breadth: When a tenure-track assistant professor has demonstrated considerable flexibility and breadth in educational and pedagogical initiatives and developments (e.g., resolved a pressing teaching need in a course outside own research field or beyond the normal teaching load), such initiatives and developments should be acknowledged and taken into account in the assessment.
3. Frontier and innovative teaching: The Department has a goal of being at the forefront of CBS’ educational and pedagogical agenda. Larger efforts in developing new courses at the research frontier and / or developing and promoting the use of innovative teaching techniques, therefore, should be acknowledged and taken into account. Evidence that such efforts have had an impact on the learning experiences of students (e.g., by successfully raising the level or improving progression in learning) is a positive signal.

Tenure-track assistant professors should organize the discussion and documentation of their educational and pedagogical initiatives, developments, and outcomes as follows:

1. A list of course experiences (course in the first column of an Excel sheet) with the following information (in a series of additional columns in the Excel sheet):
   1. Institution where the course was taught.
   2. Level of the course that was taught.
   3. Program of which the course was part.
   4. Type of course (e.g., regular course, seminar, workshop, …).
   5. The number of ECTS points that students received for taking the course.
   6. Role in the course (e.g., course coordinator, lecturer, administrator, …).
   7. The contributions that the tenure-track assistant professor made to the course.
   8. How (if at all) the tenure-track assistant professor’s own research was included.
   9. Number of hours that the tenure-track assistant professor taught on the course.
   10. Years taught on the course.
   11. Involvement of outside organizations (private or public) in the course.
   12. Number of students taking the course.
   13. Student evaluations of the course.

The tenure package should also include the most recent course manual that the tenure-track assistant professor has developed, as well as a statement in regards to completion of the APP.

1.4 Indicative Criteria for External Funding

With most business schools today depending (to at least some extent) on external funding, faculty members in the Department participate in (large-scale) external funding efforts. Given this fiscal reality, grants of external funding would signal a positive signal when the tenure-track assistant professor’s case is assessed. With the establishment of an External Funding committee, headed by the Department’s funding coordinator, it would be considered positive if tenure-track assistant professors were to participate actively in the Department’s funding efforts on an on-going basis.

1.5 Indicative Criteria for Academic Citizenship

The Department is a community where faculty members not only engage in collaborative research, education, and funding activities, but also participate in intellectual exchanges related to such activities. Thus, tenure-track assistant professors should participate actively in research seminars, brown-bag sessions, and the like. Tenure-track assistant professors should be active in, and contribute to, an open and inspiring research / education debate culture. To some extent, tenure-track assistant professors should be willing to undertake some administrative roles within the Department, as well as represent the Department within and occasionally outside CBS. Without a good citizenship record, a tenure-track professor would not be successful even though requirements to, for example, research and teaching had been fulfilled.

1.6 Indicative Criteria for Dissemination

Historically, business schools have focused on academic relevance and impact, which has influenced the problems we investigate in academic research. The Department conducts research into pressing topics affecting decision-makers and society, and its results are potentially meaningful to these audiences. Today, business schools face growing pressure to produce public value in addition to academic relevance and impact. Tenure-track assistant professors therefore ideally should be able to demonstrate how their research brings public value to the wider society. For example, Tenure-track assistant professors could engage in research and / or education collaborations with business. They could also inform and engage broader audiences through media interviews or workshops with practitioners.