IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Academic Potential: A Case for Academic Tenure and Process



This paper presents a simple theory and test of an efficiency hypothesis for academic tenure and the process by which it is granted. Our approach argues that tenure is a response to the high cost of measuring academic potential and has survived as a low cost method by which the university can better match potential entrants with incumbents and so promote superior performance by its departments. The probationary period leading into the tenure decision then becomes one where coordination gains can arise from better measurement, evaluation, and integration of new faculty. It follows that tighter tenure standards require greater evaluation efforts with greater turnover and success should result in superior department performance. To test the hypothesis, Dnes and Seaton's (2001) distinction between UK universities that prior to 1988 offered hard versus soft forms of tenure and data from the UK Research Assessment Exercise are used . After controlling for more easily measured inputs into department performance, tenure status remains a positive predictor of ranking across UK departments of economics.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Stephen Ferris & Michael McKee, 2002. "Measuring Academic Potential: A Case for Academic Tenure and Process," Carleton Economic Papers 02-06, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:car:carecp:02-06

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    Academic tenure; organization theory; measurment costs; team production;

    JEL classification:

    • K0 - Law and Economics - - General
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • L3 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise
    • J2 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    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:car:carecp:02-06. 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: (Sabrina Robineau). 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.