It is not the case that institutions set aside sufficient additional resources for faculty support and development. The threat of shrinking budgets put this effort in greater doubt. Hence the small funds which are typically set aside for faculty development would be better spent on rewarding faculty who are performing well. Departmental reviews can be potentially coercive without sufficient protection for faculty autonomy and self-direction. May short-circuit standing procedures for faculty evaluation by peers and standing judicial procedures and the principles of academic freedom and tenure.
System is fair.
Does not violate academic freedom and faculty integrity. By keeping the review in faculty hands it assures protection from intervention by the public. Can document widespread accomplishments of the faculty within the institution and community. While review should be done by peers, it must be done within a context in which the principles of tenure serve as a bulwark not only against external critics but also against casually or tendentiously critical attitudes of one's own colleagues. Increases fairness to the individual faculty member by establishing a track record of accomplishments which would serve as bridge between changes in unit administrators.