IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

A survey of Accounting Faculty Perceptions Regarding Tenure and Post-Tenure Review


  • James H. Thompson

    () (Central Washington University)


Attaining tenure is a goal of every faculty member. Indeed, at the beginning of every faculty member’s career, there is concern regarding the process of earning tenure. Many factors enter into the tenure decision, but most universities place weight on three primary factors: teaching effectiveness, research activity, and demonstration of service to the university and beyond. The relative importance of these three factors varies, but most universities expect “satisfactory” performance in all three areas. One of the historical reasons for faculty tenure is to protect academic freedom. Once tenure was attained, a faculty member’s academic freedom was considered safe. Recent developments in academia, however, are challenging the safety of both tenure and academic freedom. Some universities have implemented a post-tenure review process that subjects a faculty member to continuing, periodic review. Some argue that this process impedes a faculty member’s academic freedom. Since the university is considered “locked” into an agreement to retain a tenured faculty member, the faculty member has been under little obligation for further development, except for a self-imposed or professional obligation. The rationale behind post-tenure review is to demand a continuing responsibility of a faculty member to participate in faculty growth. The paper will gather and analyze accounting faculty perceptions regarding post-tenure.

Suggested Citation

  • James H. Thompson, 2012. "A survey of Accounting Faculty Perceptions Regarding Tenure and Post-Tenure Review," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 2(1), pages 36-45, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:hur:ijaraf:v:2:y:2012:i:1:p:36-45

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    Tenure; post-tenure review; educators; accounting; faculty;

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • M19 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Other


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hur:ijaraf:v:2:y:2012:i:1:p:36-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Hassan Danial Aslam) or (Mikhail Salazkin). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.