Given the current situation, it is not surprising that the nation's academic health centers have struggled to confront complex issues of faculty evaluation, recognition, promotion, financial compensation and retention. The traditional evaluation and promotion strategies of earlier times are no longer applicable to the current needs of academic health centers and the activity patterns of their faculty. The incentives to forge a long-term academic career have changed. Thus, there are a number of difficulties in the evaluation, promotion and retention of faculty. In response to the changing nature of the faculty, academic health centers have modified their promotion tracks.
Details vary among institutions, but the general strategy is as outlined below.
In essence, the traditional tenure promotion track has proved insufficient to cover the new activity patterns of current faculty. The system has been supplemented with additional tracks. This track, which has existed for decades, predominantly recognizes research productivity as judged by peer-reviewed grant funding and publications. For the most part, faculty who engage in more than a token amount of clinical activity are not able to achieve the necessary research credentials to be competitive in this track. However, at some institutions this track can include a highly productive clinical investigator.