Advances in Health Sciences Education

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 633–649 | Cite as

An expanded model of faculty vitality in academic medicine

  • Mary E. DankoskiEmail author
  • Megan M. Palmer
  • Thomas F. Nelson Laird
  • Amy K. Ribera
  • Stephen P. Bogdewic


Many faculty in today’s academic medical centers face high levels of stress and low career satisfaction. Understanding faculty vitality is critically important for the health of our academic medical centers, yet the concept is ill-defined and lacking a comprehensive model. Expanding on previous research that examines vital faculty in higher education broadly and in academic medical centers specifically, this study proposes an expanded model of the unique factors that contribute to faculty vitality in academic medicine. We developed an online survey on the basis of a conceptual model (N = 564) and used linear regression to investigate the fit of the model. We examined the relationships of two predictor variables measuring Primary Unit Climate and Leadership and Career and Life Management with an overall Faculty Vitality index comprised of three measures: Professional Engagement, Career Satisfaction, and Productivity. The findings revealed significant predictive relationships between Primary Unit Climate and Leadership, Career and Life Management, and Faculty Vitality. The overall model accounted for 59% of the variance in the overall Faculty Vitality Index. The results provide new insights into the developing model of faculty vitality and inform initiatives to support faculty in academic medical centers. Given the immense challenges faced by faculty, now more than ever do we need reliable evidence regarding what sustains faculty vitality.


Career satisfaction Faculty affairs Faculty development Engagement Faculty vitality 



No external funding was received for this study.


  1. Association of American Medical Colleges. (2006). AAMC data book (pp. Tables C4 and 5).Google Scholar
  2. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 496–515.Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin, R. G. (1990). Faculty vitality beyond the research university. Journal of Higher Education, 61(2), 160–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldwin, R. G., DeZure, D., Shaw, A., & Moretto, K. (2008). Mapping the terrain of mid-career faculty at a research university: Implications for faculty and academic leaders. Change, September/October, 46–55.Google Scholar
  5. Baldwin, R. G., Lunceford, C. J., & Vanderlinder, K. E. (2005). Faculty in the middle years: Illuminating an overlooked phase of academic life. The Review of Higher Education, 29(1), 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bland, C. J., Seaquist, E., Pacala, J. T., Center, B. A., & Finstad, D. (2002). One school’s strategy to assess and improve the vitality of its faculty. Academic Medicine, 77(5), 368–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bogden, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  8. Buckley, L. M., Sanders, K., Shih, M., & Hampton, C. L. (2000). Attitudes of clinical faculty about career progress, career success and recognition, and commitment to academic medicine. Results of a survey. Archives of Internal Medicine, 160(17), 2625–2629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chan, S. S., & Burton, J. (1995). Faculty Vitality in the Comprehensive University: Changing context and concerns. Research in Higher Education, 36(2), 219–234.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, S. M., Boyer, C. M., & Corcoran, M. (1985). Faculty vitality and institutional productivity: Critical perspectives for higher education. In S. M. Clark & D. R. Lewis (Eds.), Facutly vitality and institutional productivity: Critical perspectives for higher education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  11. Clark, S. M., & Lewis, D. R. (Eds.). (1985). Faculty vitality and institutional productivity: Critical perspectives for higher education. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  12. Demmy, T. L., Kivlahan, C., Stone, T. T., Teague, L., & Sapienza, P. (2002). Physicians’ perceptions of institutional and leadership factors influencing their job satisfaction at one academic medical center. Academic Medicine, 77(12, pt 1), 1235–1240.Google Scholar
  13. Gappa, J. M., Austin, A. E., & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  14. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  15. Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling Psychologist, 25, 517–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnsrud, L. K., & Heck, R. H. (1994). A university’s faculty: Predicting those who will stay and those who leave. Journal for Higher Education Management, 10(1), 71–84.Google Scholar
  17. Kelly, A. M., Cronin, P., & Dunnick, N. R. (2007). Junior faculty satisfaction in a large academic radiology department. Academic Radiology, 14(4), 445–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kirch, D. (2008). Is your academic medical center a great place to work? Lessons in building faculty vitality. Pittsburgh, PA: AAMC Group on Faculty Affairs Conference.Google Scholar
  19. Lavee, Y., & Dollahite, D. C. (1991). The linkage between theory and research in family science. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53(2), 361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Lowenstein, S. R., Fernandez, G., & Crane, L. A. (2007). Medical school faculty discontent: prevalence and predictors of intent to leave academic careers. BMC Medical Education, 7, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. National Institutes of Health. (2009). Research portfolio online reporting tool; success rates retrieved 1/28/09, from
  23. Office of Faculty Affairs and Professional Development. (2009). State of the faculty report. Available:
  24. Palmer, M. M., Dankoski, M. E., Brutkiewicz, R. R., Logio, L. S., & Bogdewic, S. P. (2010). Rx for academic medicine. To Improve the Academy, 28, 292–309.Google Scholar
  25. Pololi, L., Conrad, P., Knight, S., & Carr, P. (2009). A study of the relational aspects of the culture of academic medicine. Academic Medicine, 84(1), 106–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rausch, D. K., Ortiz, B. P., Douthitt, R. A., & Reed, L. L. (1989). The academic revolving door: Why do women get caught. CUPA-HR Journal, 40(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  27. Sambunjak, D., Straus, S. E., & Marusic, A. (2006). Mentoring in academic medicine: A systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(9), 1103–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schindler, B. A., Novack, D. H., Cohen, D. G., Yager, J., Wang, D., Shaheen, N. J., et al. (2006). The impact of the changing health care environment on the health and well-being of faculty at four medical schools. Academic Medicine, 81(1), 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shanafelt, T. D., West, C. P., Sloan, J. A., Novotny, P. J., Poland, G. A., Menaker, R., et al. (2009). Career fit and burnout among academic faculty. Archives of Internal Medicine, 169(10), 990–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Woods, S. E., Reid, A., Arndt, J. E., Curtis, P., & Stritter, F. T. (1997). Collegial networking and faculty vitality. Family Medicine, 21(1), 45–49.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary E. Dankoski
    • 1
    Email author
  • Megan M. Palmer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Thomas F. Nelson Laird
    • 3
  • Amy K. Ribera
    • 3
  • Stephen P. Bogdewic
    • 1
  1. 1.Indiana University School of MedicineIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Indiana University School of EducationIndianapolisUSA
  3. 3.Indiana University School of EducationBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations