IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Faculty Workload in a Research Intensive University: A Case Study


  • Manuel Crespo
  • Denis Bertrand


The literature on faculty workload reports differences in worked weekly hours and in the distribution of total time allocated to teaching, research, and service. Some differences are also reported concerning faculty workload by gender, academic rank, and disciplinary sectors. This study analyzes self-reported faculty workload in a Canadian research intensive university. It introduces a new way of measuring time on task by calculating it in a typical most loaded month an in a typical less loaded month. Results show an average weekly workload of 56.97 hours of which 44.1% is allocated to teaching, 35.2% to research, 5.8% to administrative tasks and 14.8% to service. There are few differences in faculty workload by gender, academic rank, and disciplinary sectors. Overall, self-reported faculty workload has increased in the last decade partly because of electronic communications and procedures and on-line pedagogical activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Crespo & Denis Bertrand, 2013. "Faculty Workload in a Research Intensive University: A Case Study," CIRANO Project Reports 2013rp-11, CIRANO.
  • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2013rp-11

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Link, Albert N. & Swann, Christopher A. & Bozeman, Barry, 2008. "A time allocation study of university faculty," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 363-374, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Blog mentions

    As found by, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. A look at faculty workload
      by Economic Logician in Economic Logic on 2013-08-22 20:59:00

    More about this item


    Faculty workload; teaching; research; service; faculty workload increase; most loaded month; less loaded month; time on task; case study;

    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:cir:cirpro:2013rp-11. 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: (Webmaster). 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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.