I appreciate the open-ended view of criteria for promotion where specific quantitative standards are not set. Candidate has opportunity to provide supporting data to make the case.
UCPT members do their job well.
It is good that there are both formal and informal reviews for evaluation of the Assistant Professors. In most cases, both the weaknesses and strengths of their teaching, scholarship, and service can be clearly articulated and documented in the years prior to tenure review. Annual feedback on performance. The apparent fact that very few people have actually been rejected for tenure indicates, I think, that the process generally works very well. The process allows an overview of criteria used in the university and therefore helps ensure that there are reasonably equitable standards set.