Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Managing Institutional Research Advancement: Implications from a University Faculty Time Allocation Study

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While much is known about faculty time allocation, we know very little about how traditional managerial factors influence faculty time allocation behaviors. We know even less about the possible downsides associated with relying on these traditional managerial factors. Using survey data from the National Science Foundation/Department of Energy Survey of Academic Researchers, our study predicts faculty time allocations to grant writing as a function of pressure from administrative superiors. We then examine how pressure from administrative superiors influences faculty job satisfaction and the likelihood to pursue uninteresting research grants. Our findings indicate that faculty time spent pursuing grants increases in response to pressure from administrative superiors but that this same pressure is associated also associated with increases in pursuit of uninteresting research grants as well as decreases in work satisfaction. Our study contributes to better understanding of the merits and limitations of traditional, hierarchical approaches to managing university faculty behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. SAR data was collected by a team of researchers in the School of Public Policy (SPP) at Georgia Institute of Technology. Prior to data collection, SPP researchers requested and were granted approval from the Institutional Review Board to conduct the survey research project according to their compliance with human subjects protection protocols in place.

  2. For more detail see http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/newsroom/press-releases/carnegie-launches-knowledge-network-what-we-know-about-value-added.

  3. See http://www.recovery.gov/arra/Transparency/fundingoverview/Pages/fundingbreakdown.aspx for current ARRA allocation levels.

  4. For a complimentary discussion pertaining to satisfaction and research center affiliation see Bozeman and Gaughan (2011).

References

  • AAUP. American Association of University Professors (1994). On the relationship of faculty governance to academic freedom. AAUP Policies and Reports. Available online: http://www.aaup.org/report/relationship-faculty-governance-academic-freedom. Accessed 07 Sept 2014.

  • Ali, M. M., Bhattacharyya, P., & Olejniczak, A. J. (2010). The effects of scholarly productivity and institutional characteristics on the distribution of federal research grants. Journal of Higher Education, 81, 164–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, S. D., Link, A. N., & Rosenbaum, D. T. (2007). Entrepreneurship and human capital: Evidence of patenting activity from the academic sector. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 31(6), 937–951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, A. E. (1990). Faculty cultures, faculty values. New Directions for Institutional Research, 68, 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, M. G. (1982). We regret to inform you: Research grants and the community college teacher. Community College Review, 10(1), 27–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, P. J., Coates, H., Dobson, I. R., Goedegebuure, L., & Meek, V. L. (2013). Academic job satisfaction from an international comparative perspective: Factors associated with satisfaction across 12 countries. Job Satisfaction around the Academic World (p. 239). doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5434-8_13.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, P., & Kyvik, S. (2012). Academic work from a comparative perspective: a survey of faculty working time across 13 countries. Higher Education, 63(4), 529–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, P., & Kyvik, S. (2013). Individual differences in faculty research time allocations across 13 countries. Research in Higher Education, 54(3), 329–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1973). The organization of academic work. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, Peter M. (1994). The organization of academic work. NewBrunswick, NJ: Transaction Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, P. (1997). Factors influencing College of Education faculty in pursuing grants. http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/mo/fullcit?p9841267. Accessed 07 Sept 2014.

  • Boyer, P., & Cockriel, I. (1998). Factors influencing grant writing: Perceptions of tenured and nontenured faculty. SRA Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, 29(3), 61–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, P., & Cockriel, I. (1999). Women faculty pursuing grants: Gender differences. Advancing Women in Leadership. http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/winter99/boyer.html. Accessed 07 Sept 2014.

  • Boyer, P., & Cockriel, I. (2001). Grant performance of junior faculty across disciplines: Motivators and barriers. Journal of Research Administration, 2(1), 19–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2013). Academic faculty working in university research centers: Neither capitalism’s slaves nor teaching fugitives. Journal of Higher Education, 84(1), 88–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Research Policy, 36(5), 694–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). Job satisfaction among university faculty: Individual, work, and institutional determinants. Journal of Higher Education, 82(2), 154–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, M. (1988). Extramural funding or extracurricular research: That is the choice a research editorial. Western Journal of Communication, 52(3), 252–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplow, T., & McGee, R. J. (1958). The academic marketplace. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchman, D. A., & Hellweg, S. A. (1981). The faculty is not in our stars: Self-generated obstacles to securing grants. Grants Magazine, 4(2), 106–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1987). The academic life: small worlds, different worlds. A Carnegie Foundation Special Report. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colbeck, C. L. (1998). Merging in a seamless blend: How faculty integrate teaching and research. Journal of Higher Education, 69(6), 647–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. R. (2009). Defending academic freedom and free inquiry. Social Research, 76(3), 811–844.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, D. (1965). Scientists at major and minor universities: a study of productivity and recognition. American Sociological Review, 30, 699–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, L. G., & Gallaher, I. (1990). Impediments to faculty involvement in grant-related activities: A case study. SRA Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, 16, 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105–115. doi:10.1037/h0030644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, L. M. (1995). Barriers and inducements to grant related activity by a college of education faculty. Research Management Review, 7(2), 10–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dundar, H., & Lewis, D. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 39(6), 607–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterly, D. C., & Pemberton, L. A. (2008). Understanding barriers and supports to proposal writing as perceived by female associate professors: Achieving promotion to professor. Research Management Review, 16(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather, J. S. (2002). The mythologies of faculty productivity: Implications for institutional policy and decision making. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 26–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather, J. S., & Beach, A. L. (2002). Variations in faculty work at research universities: Implications for state and institutional policy. The Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 97–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. F. (2005). Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science, 35(1), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W., Mulvey, E. P., & Shaw, E. C. (1995). Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychological Bulletin, 118(3), 392–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaughan, M., & Ponomariov, B. (2008). Faculty publication productivity, collaboration, and grants velocity: using curricula vitae to compare center-affiliated and unaffiliated scientists. Research Evaluation, 17(2), 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gumport, P. J. (2000). Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives. Higher Education, 39, 67–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedorn, L. S. (2000). Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes. New Directions for Institutional Research, 105, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardré, P. L., Beesley, A. D., Miller, R. L., & Pace, T. M. (2011). Faculty motivation to do research: Across disciplines in research-extensive universities. Journal of the Professoriate, 5(1), 35–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston, D., Meyer, L. H., & Paewai, S. R. (2006). Academic staff workloads and job satisfaction: Expectations and values in academe. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(1), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, R. (2006). Workload allocation models and ‘collegiality’ in academic departments. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19(1), 38–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, P. (2013). Universities and corporate universities: The higher learning industry in global society. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinfelder, J., Price, J. H., & Dake, J. A. (2003). Grant writing: Practice and preparation of university health educators. American Journal of Health Education, 34, 47–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudel, G. (2006). The ‘quality myth’: Promoting and hindering conditions for acquiring research funds. Higher Education, 52, 375–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechuga, V. M., & Lechuga, D. C. (2012). Faculty motivation and scholarly work: Self-determination and self-regulation perspectives. Journal of the Professoriate, 6(2), 59–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2005). Generating science-based growth: An econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university-industry technology transfer. European Journal of Finance, 11(3), 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., Swann, C. A., & Bozeman, B. (2008). A time allocation study of university faculty. Economics of Education Review, 27(4), 363–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamiseishvili, K., & Rosser, V. J. (2011). Examining the relationship between faculty productivity and job satisfaction. Journal of The Professoriate, 5(2), 100–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, L. H., & Evans, I. M. (2003). Motivating the professoriate: Why sticks and carrots are only for donkeys. Higher Education Management and Policy, 15(3), 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middaugh, M. F. (2001). Understanding faculty productivity: Standards and benchmarks for colleges and universities. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milem, J. F., Berger, J. B., & Dey, E. L. (2000). Faculty time allocation: A study of change over twenty years. Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 454–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Misra, J., Lundquist, J. H., & Templer, A. (2012). Gender, work time, and care responsibilities among faculty. Sociological Forum, 27(2), 300–323. doi:10.1111/j.1573-7861.2012.01319.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monahan, T. C. (1993). Barriers and inducements to grant-related activity by New Jersey State college faculty. SRA Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, 24(4), 9–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monahan, T. C. (1995). Using institutional variables to predict success in the acquisition of sponsored projects. Research Management Review, 8(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustapha, N. (2013). The influence of financial reward on job satisfaction among academic staffs at public universities in Kelantan, Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(3), 244–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paewai, S. R., Meyer, L. H., & Houston, D. J. (2007). Problem solving academic workloads management: A university response. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(3), 375–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perorazio, T. E. (2009). Curiosity and Commercialization: Faculty Perspectives on Sponsored Research, Academic Science and Research Agendas. ProQuest LLC, Dissertation.

  • Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2001). Analyzing faculty workload data using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 171–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. G., & Jung, C. S. (2014). A conceptual framework for analysis of goal ambiguity in public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 71–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J. F., Healy, R., & Sullivan, J. (2012). Oh, won’t you stay? Predictors of faculty intent to leave a public research university. Higher Education, 63(4), 421–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz, D. (2003). Does science policy exist, and if so, does it matter: Some observations on the U.S. R&D budget. Discussion Paper for Earth Institute Science, Technology, and Global Development Seminar, April 8, 2003. http://archive.cspo.org/products/papers/budget_seminar.pdf. Accessed 08 Sept 2014.

  • Schoenfeld, A. C., & Magnan, R. (1994). Mentoring in a manual: Climbing the academic ladder to tenure (2nd ed.). Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. C. (2006). The mission of the university: Medieval to postmodern transformations. Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21(1/2), 115–142. doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2003.12.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singell, L., Lillydahl, J. H., & Singell, L. D. (1996). Will changing time change the allocation of faculty time? Journal of Human Resources, 31, 429–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterner, A. (1999). Faculty attitudes toward involvement in grant-related activities at a Predominantly Undergraduate Institution (PUI). SRA Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, 31(1), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thyer, B. A. (2011). Harmful effects of federal research grants. Social Work Research., 31(7), 3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toutkoushian, R. K., & Bellas, M. L. (1999). Faculty time allocations and research productivity: Gender, race and family effects. The Review of Higher Education, 22(4), 367–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trowler, P., & Becher, T. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines (2nd ed.). New York: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walden, P. R., & Bryan, V. C. (2010). Tenured and non-tenured college of education faculty motivators and barriers in grant writing: A public university in the south. Journal of Research Administration, 41(3), 85–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, J. (2011). Academic freedom and the corporate university. Academe, 97(1), 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the assistance of graduate research assistants of the James M. Hull College of Business at Georgia Regents University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Public Affairs, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    Derrick M. Anderson

  2. James M. Hull College of Business, Georgia Regents University, 1120 15th Street, Augusta, GA, 30912, USA

    Catherine P. Slade

Authors
  1. Derrick M. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine P. Slade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine P. Slade.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anderson, D.M., Slade, C.P. Managing Institutional Research Advancement: Implications from a University Faculty Time Allocation Study. Res High Educ 57, 99–121 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9376-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9376-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation