× Copyright Disclaimer Privacy Policy Author Guidelines Current Issue Archive Publishing Ethics Join As Reviewer Advertise Submit Article Abstracting And Indexing Editorial Board Contact Editor-in-Chief Scope of the Journal About the Journal


JAPER is indexed in SCOPUS

Investigating policies and factors affecting the faculty members’ retention

Hassan Ebrahimpour Sadagheyani1, Maryam Ebrahimi1, Farin Tatari2*

1Department of Health Information Technology, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran. 2Department of Public Health, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran.

Correspondence: Farin Tatari, Department of Public Health, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran. [email protected]


ABSTRACT

Retention is the most important process of human resource management. If an organization fails to retain staff, efforts, and costs related to the recruitment and development of human resources will be wasted. The average faculty members’ turnover rate in medical schools is 38%. Regarding the importance of retention, we decided to implement a review study about the retention policies and factors that affect the faculty members’ retention. The current study was a review, conducted in 2021. According to keywords, an extensive search was conducted. 275 articles and texts were obtained. The articles were screened in three stages. Finally, 61 cases were carefully assessed and entered into the research. Factors affecting faculty members’ retention were: effective development programs, promotion opportunities, academic freedom, organizational culture, work climate, flexibility, peer support, financial support for research, physical resources and equipment, geographic location, college reputation, salaries and benefits, facilities, workload, recruitment, appointment, evaluation, and promotion system. Faculty retention policies included monitoring welfare and health, transparency in recruitment, evaluation, promotion, and compensation services, creating an appropriate climate, providing mentoring, recruitment of couples, extending pre-tenure probationary time, reducing workload for parents, leave for family members' illness, dual-career hiring, control of biases, and salary increases equivalent with present market tendencies. Regarding the permanent changes in the environment and needs, faculty retention requires systematic research to examine the factors influencing the retention and updating of retention policies based on the faculty members’ needs and preferences. Universities will achieve their missions in light of the desired retention of faculty members.

Keywords:  Retention, Policy, Faculty members, Factors, Satisfaction


Introduction  

In the current world of organizations, HRM is an important factor in the success of any organization [1]. Human Resource Management means strategic and sustainable management and administrates with the most precious property of an organization, which means its employees who have been working on it and helping the organization to achieve its goals [2]. Nowadays, financial and technological resources are not the only superiority of organizations, and possessing competent and capable individuals is a characteristic of effective organizations, and can be considered as a competitive privilege of the organization [3]. The three main processes of human resources management include recruitment, development, and retention, and from the experts, the most important of these processes is retention [4]. Retaining means preventing the leaving of people and the maintenance of individuals in the organization [5]. In other words, retention means the creation of the desired conditions of employment for the employees so that they are not willing to leave or move to another organization [6]. If an organization succeeds in human resources recruitment and development but does not retains them desirable, the staff particularly experts, may easily leave the organization and be recruited by other organizations, therefore, efforts and costs related to human resources recruiting, training, and equipping will be wasted [7]. In addition to imposing extraordinary costs, leaving and replacing employees will harm productivity due to the loss of social capital and human resources [8], and if it is not properly addressed, it can cause problems in organizations for years and even threaten their existence [9]. The recent recession in the world has also caused much emphasis on the importance of retaining key employees of the organization [8]. Over the past decades, the loss of human resources among specialized and thoughtful organizational employees around 20% considered as normal, but today there is little evidence of accepting this level of human resource loss and displacement in the organizations, therefore, it is necessary to minimize the resignation of qualified individuals from the organizations with proper retention [10].

In higher education organizations, faculty members are one of the main capitals that have the duty of training of specialized staff and are responsible for providing scientific and research services [11] and since the faculty members of the medical science universities are also responsible for ensuring the health of the community, their management, and in particular their retention management, is very important [12].

According to the AAMC data, the average turnover in faculty members in American medical faculties is 38%. Studies show that medical science universities have paid more attention to faculty members’ retention in recent years because the lack of proper retention and leaving the university by faculty members impose high costs on universities. The cost of leaving and replacing a generalist physician is 100,000 $, a specialist of 280,000$, and a subspecialist of 500,000$ [13]. The excessive leave of faculty members can affect the productivity and efficacy of universities. Regarding the importance of retention, we decided to implement a review study about the retention policies and factors affecting the faculty members’ retention.

Materials and Methods

The present study is a review done in the year 2021 by revising the published and obtainable internal and external sources related to the policies and factors affecting faculty members’ retention by looking through the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, Magiran, and SID databases with the keywords of Retention, Policy, Faculty Members, Factors, Satisfaction in Persian and English language. E-books, theses, as well as universities' websites, were also searched. 250 articles and texts were collected. For purposive sampling, all papers were screened in 3 stages: A) initial or title screening, B) secondary screening according to the abstract and introduction of the papers, and C) tertiary screening involving a brief study, prioritization according to the conceptual richness, and complete investigation of the articles. The inclusion criteria included: 1. papers only in Persian and English; 2. Publication year ranging from 2000 and 2021; 3. Only related to faculty members' retention; 4. access to the text of articles. The exclusion criteria were: 1) languages other than English or Persian and 2) inadequacy of the existing data or lack of adequate explanation of the applied methods. After the recognition of pertinent articles, their reference lists were also screened for finding further studies. Thereafter, the remaining articles were reviewed meticulously. Finally, out of 275 evaluated articles, 61 cases were carefully assessed and entered into the study.

Results and Discussion

Factors affecting faculty members’ retention

Studies about faculty member retention at universities in Europe show the most important retention factors from the perspective of faculty members are academic freedom, time to research the geographic location of the college, simulation peer community, and geographic location of the college and career development opportunities. The results also showed that the conception and understanding of the heads of colleges and faculty members are different about factors affecting faculty members' retention. The researchers considered 7 categories for retention factors: 1- the school's culture and values 2- the school's reputation and position 3- the condition of employment 4- individual and professional development 5- teaching time 6- research climate 7- work environment.

According to the heads of colleges' opinion, the school's reputation and the school's culture and values were the most important categories in faculty members' retention, while for faculty members, the most important categories were individual and professional development and condition of employment [14].

The results of Tourangeau's survey under title Determinants of nurse faculty intention to remain employed at the University of Ontario shows there were four effective categories on faculty members' retention that each category included several factors: 1- Personal characteristics include factors such as age, marital status, and job opportunities for partners, having dependents, health status, and the potency to balance work and life  2- Work environment and organizational support including factors such as the quality of faculty leadership, the organizational climate of the institution, the quality of the physical work environment, access to required human resources, access to required material resources, quality of communication with peers, adequate payment and remuneration, job satisfaction and promotion opportunities 3- Job content including factors such as autonomy, role variety, support and time to conduct research, student success, student views and workload 4- External Characteristics including factors such as unionization and collective agreements, availability of outside opportunities, local situation and local economy [15].

The study was conducted by Soofi et al. (2018) with the aim  of  identifying and prioritize factors affecting attraction and retention of faculty members in universities. The results indicated that it is important to pay attention to the factors of brand and university reputation and their values and cultures play important roles in attracting scientific talents. Furthermore, in order to succeed in the retention of the present scientific talents, it is important to pay attention to the values, the culture, and the atmosphere of instruction [16].

 

The results of Ries et al. survey under the title: “Retention of junior faculty in academic medicine at the University of California, San Diego” shows participation in the development programs has significant effects on Retention and faculty members who participated in the program faculty participating in the faculty development program were 67% more likely to remain at compared with nonparticipating faculty [17].

The results of the research entitled: “An empirical study of faculty retention strategies and impact on the length of service among Management Institutions in Bangalore” showed that the faculties tend to have a firm belief in staying longer in the organization as a result of a noble working environment and for providing good training and development. It has been shown that as the length of service is increasing, the faculties grow to become less satisfied with the appraisal system, the recognition, and reward system and that the support of the higher table does not play a major role in their stay in the organization [18].

The research entitled "factors influencing recruitment and retention of nurse educators" showed that from nurses' point of view positive work environment is effective on nursing faculty members’ retention that this issue was mentioned by 97.5% of the respondents. 96.8% believed that a work climate that encourages collegial working connections and flexible working hours were important, 96% agreed that the employee benefits were also an effective factor, and 89.7% believed that salary is important on faculty members’ retention. Therefore, the most important factors influencing the nursing faculty's retention are a positive work environment, flexibility in schedule, collegial environment, administration’s support, benefits, and faculty development. The salary was the twelfth important factor [19].

A study entitled retention of faculty of color in academic nursing was conducted by Hamilton et al. (2016). They reviewed 25 articles from the nursing literature following PRISMA guidelines, using a critical race theory framework. The results showed faculty of color retention relies on mentoring, organizational climate, and workplace parity [20].

A Phenomenological Study was conducted by Dittmer et al. (2017) with purpose of identifying recruitment and retention of non-Caucasian faculty at small Midwestern Private Institutions. Data collection occurred through a narrative inquiry approach by using one-on-one interviews. The participants were 7 non-Caucasian faculty members. The results showed from the perspective of the participants’ retention factors were   working directly with students, the collegial atmosphere. Midwest is welcoming [21].

Research by Conklin et al. about faculty members' retention in the pharmacy showed that the top five reasons for faculty members' retention were: (1) freedom in work, (2) geographic location, (3) good fringe benefits, (4) relationship with department colleagues, and (5) family responsibilities and the top five reasons for faculty members' retention were: (1) seeking new challenge for change, (2) excessive workload, (3) poor salary, (4) relationship with school/college administration, (5) lack of research support. The authors concluded that pharmacy faculty members' decision to stay or leave the institution is related to making a sense of commitment toward the institution. Supporting the institution and the head of the department can also increase the commitment of faculty members [22].

The results of Zeeshan Mubarak et al. research in Pakistan in 2012 on the faculty members' retention showed two variables, the opportunities for learning and growth and the pay satisfaction which has a considerable influence on faculty members’ retention, opportunities for learning, and growth have a higher impact as compared to pay satisfaction on faculty retention [23].

The results of research by Mshana et al. in Tanzania show that the top 5 factors in faculty members’ recruitment and retention were an opportunity for professional growth, support from colleagues, opportunities for promotion, support for scholarly activities, and staff collegiality. Only 7.1% of the faculty members stated that salary is the most important factor in attracting and retaining, and the majority of faculty members believed that the opportunity for professional growth was the most important factor in keeping them at the university [24].

A study entitled faculty retention in regional medical schools in Iran: a qualitative content analysis was conducted by Shaterjalali1 et al. (2021). The findings were classified into three categories and 14 subcategories. The first category was “retention facilitators” including four subcategories of facilitated communication, proximity to major universities, gaining experience, and support by authorities. The second category was “retention threats” including six subcategories of social infrastructure, individual dimension, occupation dimension, economic dimension, sense of respect, and executive management. The third category was “retention strategies” which included four subcategories of recruitment and promotion processes, inter-university collaboration with type I universities, facilitation of the scientific growth, and fulfilment of the safety needs [25].

A research entitled “A Study of Faculty Retention Factors in Educational Institutes in Context with ABET[1]was conducted by Khan et al. )2018(. The results show that only very few faculty members leave the institution because of higher student-to-faculty ratio or denial of tenure. Also, most of institutions concentrate on providing reduced number of lecture hours per week to keep their faculty members happy and perform research at the institution [26].

A research was conducted by Lindfelt Pharm et al. (2018) with purpose of determining the impact of work-life balance on intention to stay in academia. In this research results from a national web-based survey administered via Qualtrics® to American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) members were utilized. Bivariate analyses were conducted to compare differences among faculty stating an intention to stay or leave academia. A logistic multivariate model was used to determine if work-life balance remains significant when controlling for other variables and if survey results support the Border-Crossing theory. The results showed Nearly all (seven hundred of 811 responders, or 86.3%) stated a desire to stay in academia. Faculty with higher work-life balance were more likely to report an intent to remain in academia. Male, older, full-professor and non-pharmacy practice faculty (social or administrative science, pharmacology, medicinal chemistry and others) were more likely to state an intention to remain in academia relative to their counterparts. Lower stress, as measured by the validated Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) scores, was seen among faculty stating a desire to remain in academia. Work-life balance remained significantly inversely related to career change intention after controlling for all other factors [27].

Some reasons for faculty members leaving from the perspective of senior academic administrators include 1-Better opportunities such as higher salary; more resources; more prestigious department, institution; administrative appointment (e.g., dean); position outside academe; additional education or training 2- Location and family such as career opportunities for the spouse; better policies related to childcare (e.g., tuition remission); parental leave; desirable geographic location; to be closer to family 3- Work environment and fit such as better campus climate for, e.g., women faculty; intellectual fit; lack of collegiality in the unit; potential for better work-life balance in a different type of position 4- Retirement such as early retirement 5- Writing on the wall such as not well suited to faculty career; the poor likelihood of tenure, promotion, contract renewal [28].

Ambrose et al.'s research on why some faculty members leave the university has been conducted by interviewing 123 faculty members. Key findings of the research indicated: 1. the salary rarely was the primary motivation for leaving the university 2. The theme of collegiality was the most mentioned issue. This factor included: lack of time and interest on the part of colleagues, intra-departmental tensions, and incivility 3. The existence of effective mentoring or lack of it was an important source of satisfaction or dissatisfaction 4. Lack of initial communication about the appointment, promotion, and tenure processes was an important issue, especially among new faculty members 5. The role of the department head is vital to the success and satisfaction of junior faculty.

The results also indicated that factors such as collaboration, departmental leadership, mentoring, and effective communication in the appointment, promotion, and recruitment processes are the most momentous reasons for the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of faculty members. Internal benefits such as institutional reputation, autonomy, influence, a sense of belonging, salary, facilities, fringe benefits, work rules, and also external benefits such as quality of life, family, friendships, and financial considerations outside of salary also affect the faculty members’ retention [29].

Pololi et al. in 2012 reviewed 4578 faculty members in 26 medical schools and found that one quarter (25%) of them intended to leave college or university due to negative cultural attitudes of the workplace, absence of feeling of dependency on a community, moral anxiety, and lack of interaction. The important finding was that faculty members' discontent was related to negative attitudes and anxiety about the non-communicative and ethical culture of the workplace [30].

The University of Colorado investigated the recruitment and retention of faculty members. The research findings showed that the most important factors mentioned for leaving the university obtained in the survey and interview with faculty members were: 1. Non-competitive salaries 2. Absence of research support (financial, library, travel, research assistants) 3. Feeling of professional isolation and lack of support from peers 4. Spouse's employment, especially among women faculty. Other factors mentioned were: absence of financial support for teaching activities, inadequate housing assistance programs, non-competitive benefits (health insurance, retirement, and dependents' tuition), inadequate staffing support, high executive responsibility, poor quality of workplace and Laboratory space, lack of flexibility in workload and lack of options for child care [31].

Fuller et al.'s research also emphasized the role of mentoring in faculty members’ retention and confirmed that mentoring is effective in reducing workplace stress, especially in the field of scholarship [32].

Many surveys consider job satisfaction as the main factor in faculty members’ retention, so factors affecting job satisfaction can also affect retention. The results of research by Selesho et al. in South African universities show that the most important factor in retaining faculty members is job satisfaction. The results also showed that job satisfaction is linked with career growth and academic development [33].

Faculty members’ retention policies

The findings of the research about the recruitment and retention in American universities showed that universities use the following effective policies for faculty members’ retention:

  1. Flexible policies that include:
    • Increasing Pre-Tenure Probationary Period: The results of the research showed that in 25 years passed universities using the probationary period have increased (from 7 years to 9 to 10 years) [34]
    • Tenure-clock-stopping policies: These policies allow faculty members in the path of tenured employment to continue the probationary period. The clock-stopping policies were often done for three reasons: child care, taking care of sick family members, and medical disabilities. Most universities, such as Chicago, Minnesota, and Duke, also assign additional year tenure for adoption [35]
    • Decreasing full-time employment and use of the part-time system: Many American universities such as Washington, Berkeley, and Iowa use this policy [36]
    • Reducing workload for parents: Stanford and Harvard, for example, allow the workload of a qualified faculty (sole caregiver) to be reduced to 20 hours per week with full salary
    • Leave for family members' illness: Massachusetts University, for example, considers 5 days leave for child illness, caring for a spouse, adopter, faculty, and his wife parent, brother, sister, grandfather, and grandmother.
    • Dual Career hiring: Universities like Berkeley, Massachusetts, Michigan, Illinois [35], Colorado [31], and Washington [37] apply this policy.

Other policies include:

  1. Creating mentoring and networking programs: At the University of California, San Diego, the new faculty members complete a seven-month program that focuses on developing individual skills, networking across the institution, building a mentoring relationship with a senior faculty member, and understanding organizational culture.
  2. Addressing childcare needs:  For example, Stanford and Cornell University pay faculty members 5,000 $ annual subsidy for Childcare
  3. Controlling of gender and race biases: Gender bias can be seen at the stage of recruitment. Many universities, such as the University of Florida, have online courses that are considered for recruitment committee members and the head of departments. Stanford University, in addition to publishing a booklet on faculty recruiting and retaining designs a booklet specifically for each recruitment and search that includes information about equal opportunities for outreach, Association of American Universities (AAU) data on applicant pools, materials on biases, and legal guidelines for basic interviews. The University of Michigan has been able to increase the percentage of female hires from 14% to 34% during four years by training the Recruiting Committee on gender and race.
  4. Monitoring the Faculty Search Process: For example, at the University of California, a group of senior faculty members convenes as “Equity Advisors” and participate in faculty recruiting by approving search strategies and raising awareness of best practices.
  5. Training department chairs to manage flexibility: For example, the University of California has provided an online booklet for chairs and deans to promote departmental culture to encourage the use of family-responsive policies. The University of Texas has provided guidelines that the meetings should be between 8:00 and 5:00 PM so that there is minimizing conflict with family responsibilities. The University of Washington has considered workshops for university heads that discuss best practices and strategies to advance women and underrepresented minorities.
  6. Ensuring the implementation of flexible policies: for example, the University of Oregon has considered an office and staff to coordinate and direct faculty members for family-friendly policies.
  7. Supporting senior managers to encourage and adhere to the policy: For example, universities such as Stanford and California have statements that show managers' commitment to gender equity and family-friendly policies [35].
  8. Conducting exit interviews or surveys with faculty who are leaving university to identify factors impacting retention [38].

Piercy et al. conducted 3 focused group discussions with new faculty members on how the university could help the faculty members' success and retention. The general recommendations were: 1. The University must value all departments and faculty 2- Networking strategies should be created within academic culture 3- Faculty members need opportunities to participate in decision-making 4. Mentors should be freely chosen by individuals 5- An ideal mentoring program would happen at the departmental and college levels 6. University must support faculty spouses 7- Salary increases must happen on an ordered basis and should be equivalent with current market trends 8-  Appoint clear constant policies, expectations, and procedures within departments, across departments, across college 9- Release untenured faculty members from teaching burden so that they have time to expand research early in their tenure process 10- Encourage active mentors [35].

Latif et al. In a study entitled "Satisfaction of junior faculty with academic role functions " had two suggestions to improve the satisfaction of faculty members: 1. Ensuring that applicants' value for interviews for faculty positions matches the institution's value system 2- Designing and implementing effective mentoring and development programs [39].

One of the effective strategies to recruit and retain is the development and implementation of doctoral student preparation programs. At universities, these actions are called the preparing future faculty (PFF) program. In the PFF, students learn about the multiple faculty roles teaching, research, and services. This program prepares students to have a good start as a new faculty [40, 41].

Regarding the faculty members’ retention, it must be acknowledged that the university market has become a business place of talent and employees are choosing where and when to work and present their talents and competencies, and on the other hand, universities should recognize the factors affecting the faculty maintenance and adopt appropriate policies to retain faculty members to minimize the amount of leave.

Most research conducted in the field of factors affecting the faculty members’ retention states that one of the most important factors affecting the faculty members' retention is developing programs and professional outreach opportunities. The speed of knowledge progress is so high that universities need to rebuild themselves to accompany the accelerated environmental change [42].

In such a situation, education and human resource development are fundamental strategies for responding to needs and environmental changes. In recent years, these changes have required the need to train faculty members and have made this concept more and more expanding [43].

Faculty members have various duties and responsibilities that are determined by their college vision and mission, disciplines, degree, and that they have managerial or leadership responsibilities. Faculty members have several roles, including education, research, services, management, and external professional activities [44]. Studies show that the multiplicity of faculty roles leads to stress and role conflict. Stress is a process that makes people believe they are unable to cope with the existing situation and feel anxiety, tension, frustration, and anger. Role conflict occurs when one has to have two different and inconsistent roles at a time. Kahn et al. showed that high levels of stress and role conflict are related to issues such as low levels of job satisfaction and leaving the organization [45]. So, as Blund et al. have stated, faculty development should be designed in a set of programs that will prepare institutions and faculty members to play their different roles [44].

Also, faculty development can enhance faculty members' retention through increasing job motivation and creating a sense of belonging to the university [43]; therefore, university administrators should design development programs with the participation of faculty members through identifying faculty needs and goals, paying attention to their roles and considering the goals of the university and with the continuation of the programs induce faculty retention [43, 44].

Culture, values, and organizational climate are the factors influencing the retention of faculty members, which have been mentioned in many studies. One of the strengths of an organization is the desired organizational culture. An organizational culture that reflects the characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of the organization can illustrate its internal and external faces in terms of staff adherence with values, principles, attitudes, and other related beliefs. In an organization, organizational culture is considered as the main variable, and factors such as independence and academic freedom, the type of structure, and support of managers, which in general are different characteristics of organizational culture, change the pattern of behavior of the organization and staff. Desirable organizational culture changes the staff behavior to increase commitment to the organization, and the staff commitment to the organization also leads to staff retention in the organization [46]. Issues such as workplace negative cultural views, lack of respect for organizational justice, lack of sense of belonging to the community, feeling of moral anxiety, and the lack of professionalism can disappoint and dissatisfy faculty members, change important job decisions, and tend to leave the organization [47].

The processes of justice play a major role in organizations. How to deal with individuals in organizations may affect employees' beliefs, feelings, attitudes, and behaviors. Fair organizational behavior with employees leads to their higher commitment to the organization. Organizational justice is a term for describing the role of justice that is directly related to job positions. In the discussion of organizational justice, it is suggested in which ways employees should be treated to feel that they are fairly treated. This discussion can be related to the employees’ selection, job promotion, and benefits. Employees' response to inequality in the organization can lead to leaving the organization. Transparency in the processes and opportunities for fair promotion and the comprehensiveness of evaluation and promotion systems can also be one aspect of justice. It is necessary for the promotion and evaluation system to be able to evaluate all of the faculty members’ activities and can provide a clear picture of their performance [48] to make decisions more equitable. Universities can help faculty retention by strategies such as fairness in paying appropriate salaries and benefits, being neutral in decisions about selecting and promoting employees and making decisions based on competencies and abilities, avoiding any racial or gender discrimination, and creating an organizational environment that is respected all identities [49].

Academic freedom is one of the factors affecting organizational culture and climate. Scientific freedom is the main distinction between the institution of the university and other social institutions. Scientific freedom is the main distinction between the institution of the university, and other social institutions, in other words, it is an essential part of the definition of the university [50].

Academic freedom is one of the principles of support, according to which faculty members in a healthy society should have their natural right to freely exchange ideas and express theories in the classroom, to freely conduct research and publish their results, and to make professional opine about academic subjects and the university should respect these rights [51]. Of course, scientific freedom must not conflict with the missions of the organization, because, while the faculty has academic freedom, its activities must be in line with the missions of the organization [52]. The supportive environment of managers, peers, and mentoring are also factors influencing the faculty members’ retention.

Organizations and managers have realized that they will benefit from investing in staff support. Because employees who feel protected are committed and satisfied, they are less likely to be absent and simply do not leave the organization that all of these factors improve the organizational performance and bring it to its goals. Riggle et al. in a meta-analysis study, showed that the organizational and managerial support from the staff would strongly increase commitment and job satisfaction and reduce leave the organization [53]. A supportive organizational climate that includes the managerial and peer's support and faculty members can benefit from mentoring, has a considerable impact on faculty members' retention.  Researchers have shown that mentoring is effective in reducing stress, and reducing stress can enhancement satisfaction by increasing faculty members' satisfaction [32]. Due to the greater organization leaving in novice faculty, especially women and faculty of color [20, 54] having successful mentors can help the new faculty understand the unspoken rules and increase its satisfaction and productivity, therefore, universities should pay more attention to the issues of faculty members mentoring [55]. Attention to flexible policies can also have a considerable impact on faculty members’ retention.

Medical faculties have changed over the last decades and requirements and rules for research and employment in terms of publications and articles and research budgets have dramatically changed and have become more difficult. Universities' demographics have changed, and the faculty members' life is completely different in comparison with the past.

 In the last few decades, we have witnessed a change of generations and generational differences in faculty. There are many differences between the current generation (generation X) compared to the previous generation (silent generation) of the faculty. Generation X marries later, if the balance allows, they work hard, wait for great job searches, and they are not very devoted. In this generation, both parents are employed outside the home probably. Parents divorced in generation x are twice the silent generation. Because of this category of life experiences, the x generation is in search of a greater sense of family and demands flexible and family-friendly policies. In addition to the differences between generations, major changes have occurred in the faculty market, which put pressure on universities to consider more flexible policies. Since most young women enter university during their earlier reproductive years, and also large numbers of faculty members have entered their 60s, colleges and universities must find ways to review and discuss the unprecedented changes in the labor force [56].

The desire for flexibility and work-life balance, even in the choice of discipline and expertise is evident by male and female students. Recent trends among medical students show that residency demands for expertise where life is manageable (such as anesthesia and skin) and increased demand for primary care have declined. Many young people believe that they can succeed at the expense of time and the health of their families and believe that “a fuller life outside of medicine makes us better doctors”[57].

It is anticipated that in the next 30 to 40 years, the balance between work and life in the workplace will become the most important issue. This concern, especially in families, leads to action by corporations and even the government that determines the day called "Day of work-life balance" in Ireland, there is a month named "Work and Family Month" in America as well as consulting and start-up companies web internet sites to spread the culture of work-life balance [58]. Therefore, more flexible policies should be considered for faculty such as increased pre-tenure probationary period, reduced workload for parents, Using the part-time system, tenure-clock-stopping policies (to care for children, care for elderly family members and diseased), and the combined employment of spouses that represents that the university has family-friendly policies and thinks of the personal well-being of the staff.

It should be noted that the environment and organizational culture that supports the use of flexible policies are particularly important. The fact that few faculty members have used tenure-clock-stopping and part-time policies are indicative of a lack of coordination between expressed policies and operation.

A lot of people may not use these policies for reasons such as the limitations of the research or clinical workplace, the organizational culture that does not support the use of these policies, or the absence of knowledge of faculty members about such policies. Assigning a special committee for faculty members' retention, establishment a faculty retention office, and designing a special website for informing policies can help universities in this field [59].

Job satisfaction is also an important factor in faculty retention. It is related to how much a profession is responsive to the individual’s needs, abilities, interests, and personality specifications. Therefore, recognizing the faculty members’ needs, motivations, tendencies, factors of satisfaction and dissatisfaction, and understanding the faculty members' preferences and concerns are not only necessary but also essential for the adoption of proper policies, appropriate strategies, and effective programs. Regarding the fact that younger faculty members are more likely to leave the university because of dissatisfaction in comparison to the older faculty members [47] therefore, it is important to address the issues of this group of faculty members. One of the factors influencing job satisfaction and retention is modifying and updating policies and processes, especially faculty members' promotion policies that should always be addressed by universities [60].

Most researches indicate that the salary system is one of the factors influencing faculty members’ retention but it is less important than the other factors such as opportunities for development and career outreach. Studies indicate that the salary system should be designed in such a way that it has the following features: 1- Sufficient for subsistence 2- Create motivation and encourage employees to better performance 3- It is economical and effective and can fit with the organization's financial capacity and employees competencies and skills 4- Enables the organization to compete with other organizations and in comparison with the similar organizations' salary system, have better or at least the same attractions  5- be logical, and employees accept it 6-be fair and just 6- That is, salary commensurate with the individuals' specialty, skill, competence and performance [61].

Compensation based on the performance contains the message that employees’ competence and the outcome are very important, and justice requires payments to be proportional to the degree of individuals’ effectiveness and merit. The necessity for such a system is the existence of an appropriate system for faculty members’ performance evaluation, which can use the outcomes of the evaluation system for faculty members’ compensation by giving feedback. This fair compensation process can help faculty members’ retention. Considering the system of rewards based on performance and merit in addition to paying fixed salaries can be effective in equitizing this process. The reward system applies by identifying the type of partnership and the expected effort of individuals and the expectations of their performance.

Today organizations must use the compensation system instead of the salary system. The essential characteristic of the compensation system is paying attention to the non-financial compensation of employees' efforts in addition to paying attention to their financial needs. This theory is proposed that, among the many and varied human needs, only a few can be directly satisfied with money, and many non-material motivations like the desire to succeed, power, perfection, and self-discovery affect human actions and behaviors. In other words, employees are not just looking for salary, rather they are looking for an organization to provide them a sustainable future and show the way of success [62].

Non-financial rewards can include a promotion, authority and responsibility, appreciation and veneration, participation in decision making, leisure time, workplace convenience, social activities, feedback, flexible working hours, and social rights [63]. Therefore, universities can use nonfinancial rewards to increase their faculty retention rates. The benefits that universities offer are also effective in faculty retention, and universities with considering benefits such as increasing the employer's contribution in health insurance, expanding housing assistance programs, expanding home loans with subsidies lower than the market, increasing housing assistance and discounts on tuition for faculty dependents can increase satisfaction and thus enhance the faculty members' retention [31].

Conclusion

According to what has been said, it should be acknowledged that the faculty members’ retention has special importance as valuable university resources and universities should adopt appropriate policies in this regard. Universities should investigate why and for what reasons faculties leave the university through exit interviews, identify leaving factors and attempt to eliminate them by developing appropriate policies. Regarding the permanent changes in the environment and needs, faculty retention requires systematic research to examine the factors affecting the retention and updating of retention policies based on the faculty members’ needs and preferences. Universities will achieve their missions in light of the desired retention of faculty members

Acknowledgments: None

Conflict of interest: None

Financial support: None

Ethics statement: None

 

[1] Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology

References

1.       Davoudi S, Fartash K. Turnover Intentions: Iranian Employees. J Indian Manag. 2013;10(1):89-99.

2.       Abtahi H, Aarabi M, Jafarinia S, Najjari R. Human resource  management strategies. first ed. ed. Tehran: pouya; 2008.

3.       Tahmasbi R, Gholipour A, Javaherizade E. Talent Management: Explain Identify and the Rank Influencing Factors on Recruitment and Retention of Academic talent. Public Manag Res. 2012;5(17):5-26.

4.       Bamberger P, Sisselman M, Borin M. The impact of increased employee retention on performance in a customer contact centr. Manuf Serv Oper Manag. 2006;8(3):235-52. doi:10.1287/msom.1060.0106?journalCode=msom

5.       Mirsepasi N. Human resource strategic management & labour relations 3 rd Tehran ed. Tehran: Mir; 2013.

6.       Qorbani Q, RezaeeRad M. the management role of police cheifs in retention of police staff. Q Stud Police Manag. 2011;6(1):117-32.

7.       BeikMohammadlou H. Identify components of human resource retention in the oil industry. Fourteenth International Conference on Oil, Gas and Petrochemical; Iran,Tehran. 2010.

8.       Flint D, Haley L, McNally J. Individual and organizational determinants of turnover intent. Pers Rev. 2013;42(5):552-72.

9.       Rashidi M. Explaining &design  the basics model   for maintenance  of  Knowledge workers with an emphasis on human resource management practices. Tehran University. 2014.

10.    Mirhosseini Zavare M. Maintenance strategies for human resources in organizations. J Artif Intell. 2008;3(9):76-7.

11.    Ahmady S, Tatari F, Yazdani S, Hosseini S. Human Resources Management models for Recruitment of Faculty Members: A Critical Review. Int J Med Res Health Sci. 2016;5(12):356-64.

12.    Hashemi MM. Analysis the management of universities and institutions of higher education in recent years. 2012. Available from: http://www.imna.ir/vdcayon0.49nuo15kk4.html.

13.    Schloss EP, Flanagan DM, Culler CL, Wright AL. Some hidden costs of faculty turnover in clinical departments in one academic medical center. Acad Med. 2009;84(1):32-6.

14.    Klemenčič M. Paying the professoriate: A global comparison of compensation and contracts. Taylor & Francis; 2013.84.

15.    Tourangeau AE, Thomson H, Saari M, Widger K, Ferron EM, MacMillan K. Determinants of nurse faculty intention to remain employed. Open J Nurs. 2012;2(3):254-61.

16.    Bamdad Soofi J, Emamat MSMM. Identifying and Prioritizing the Effective Factors in the Attraction and Retention of Scientific Talents at Universities. J Res Hum Resour Manag. 2018;10(3):97-120.

17.    Ries A, Wingard D, Gamst A, Larsen C, Farrell E, Reznik V. Measuring faculty retention and success in academic medicine. Acad Med. 2012;87(8):1046-51.

18.    Mathew R. An empirical study of faculty retention strategies and impact on length of service among management institutions in Bangaluru. Int J Res Soc Sci. 2015;5(1):762-8.

19.    Evans JD. Factors influencing recruitment and retention of nurse educators reported by current nurse faculty. J Prof Nurs. 2013;29(1):11-20.

20.    Hamilton N, Haozous EA. Retention of faculty of color in academic nursing. Nurs Outlook. 2017;65(2):212-21.

21.    Dittmer C. Recruitment and retention of non-caucasian faculty at small midwestern private institutions: A phenomenological study. J Bus Divers. 2017;17(1):131-44.

22.    Conklin MH, Desselle SP. Job turnover intentions among pharmacy faculty. Am J Pharm Educ. 2007;71(4):62.

23.    Mubarak RZ, Wahab Z, Khan NR. Faculty retention in higher education institutions of Pakistan. J Theor Res Educ. 2012;7(2):65-78.

24.    Mshana S, Manyama M. Factors influencing the recruitment and retention of faculty at the Catholic University of Health and Allied Sciences, Bugando, Mwanza, Tanzania. Afr J Health Prof Educ. 2013;5(2):88-90.

25.    Shaterjalali M, Gholampoor Y, Jeihooni AK, Mansoori Y, Homayounfar R, Ehrampoush E, et al. Faculty retention in regional medical schools in Iran: a qualitative content analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):1-8.

26.    Khan FQ, Buhari SM, Tsaramirsis G, Rasheed S. A Study of Faculty Retention Factors in Educational Institutes in Context With ABET. Front Educ. 2021;6:1-9.

27.    Lindfelt T, Ip EJ, Gomez A, Barnett MJ. The impact of work-life balance on intention to stay in academia: results from a national survey of pharmacy faculty. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2018;14(4):387-90.

28.    Mathews K, Benson T. Findings from the First Ever Multi-Institutional Survey of Faculty Retention & Exit. Harv Grad Sch Educ. 2017. Available from: https://coache.gse.harvard.edu/faculty-retention-and-exit-survey.

29.    Ambrose S, Huston T, Norman M. A qualitative method for assessing faculty satisfaction. Res High Educ. 2005;46(7):803-30.

30.    Pololi LH, Krupat E, Civian JT, Ash AS, Brennan RT. Why are a quarter of faculty considering leaving academic medicine? A study of their perceptions of institutional culture and intentions to leave at 26 representative US medical schools. Acad Med. 2012;87(7):859-69.

31.    Davis RH, Gleeson T, Hu-DeHart E, Kintsch W, Liston D, Norman A, et al. Faculty recruitment and retention task force report. University of Colorado, 2001.

32.    Fuller K, Maniscalco M, Droege M. The Role of the Mentor in Retaining Junior Pharmacy Faculty Members. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008;72(2):1-5.

33.    Selesho JM, Naile I. Academic staff retention as a human resource factor: University perspective. Int Bus  Econ Res J. 2014;13(2):295-304.

34.    Cartwriyh R. Talent management: a new look at human capital development. Trans: Goodarzi, AM and Hosseini, SJ, Tehran: Rasa Publication. 2008.

35.    Piercy F, Giddings V, Allen K, Dixon B, Meszaros P, Joest K. Improving Campus Climate to Support Faculty Diversity and Retention: A Pilot Program for New Faculty. Innov High Educ. 2005;30(1):53-66.

36.    Clawson D. Tenure and the future of the university. Science. 2009;324(5931):1147-8.

37.    University W. Faculty retention toolkit University of Washington. 2006. Available from: https://advance.washington.edu/.../Faculty%20retention.

38.    Division of Diversity and Community Engagement. Inclusive Retention Toolkit. The University of Texas at Austin. 2016.

39.    Latif D, Grillo J. Satisfaction of Junior Faculty with Academic Role Functions. Am J Pharm Educ. 2001;65(2):137-43.

40.    Bataille G, Brown B. Faculty Career Paths: Multiple Routes to Academic Success and Satisfaction. USA: An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group; 2006.

41.    Baldwin RG. Faculty Career Paths: Multiple Routes to Academic Success and Satisfaction. J High Educ. 2008;79(3):353-5.

42.    Mahmoudi RK. Investigate the role of in-service training courses to increase employee productivity. Tehran University. 2003.

43.    Majidi F. A survey on the appropriate educational development strategies for the faculty members of Mashhad Medical Faculty. Mashad: Mashad University of Medical Sciences; 2013.

44.    Ahmady S. Faculty development in medical education : A comprehensive approach: Karolinska, Institutet University of Stockholm; 2009.

45.    Ahmady S, Changiz T, Masiello I, Brommels M. Organizational role stress among medical school faculty members in Iran: dealing with role conflict. BMC Med Educ. 2007;7(14):1-10.

46.    Yaghobi N, Chanijani AA. Studying the relationship between the strategic approach of human resource retaining system and employees' organizational commitment. Q J Public Organ Manag. 2014;2(3):49-64.

47.    Stearns J, Everard KM, Gjerde CL, Stearns M, Shore W. Understanding the Needs and Concerns of Senior Faculty in Academic Medicine: Building Strategies to Maintain This Critical Resource. Acad Med. 2013;88(12):1927-33.

48.    Tatari F, editor A survey on validity and effective factors of faculty evaluation by studens. The First National Congress of the Challenges and strategies for developing student participation in educational system. Iran, Mashhad; 2014.

49.    Bardbar H. The Concept of Organizational Justice and Its Dimensions. 2013. Available from: http://www.modir.ir/Articles/4400.aspx.

50.    Ghofrani M. University autonomy and dynamism. The first conference of Third Plan of Country Development. 2002.

51.    Karimian Z, Kojouri J, Lotfi F, Amini M. Higher Education Administration and Accountability; the Necessity of Autonomy and Academic Freedom from Faculties’ Viewpoint. Iran J Med Educ. 2012;11(8):855-63.

52.    Walz J. Academic Freedom for Whom: Institutions or Individuals? : RE: Reflections and Explorations. 2015. Available from: https://blogs.lt.vt.edu/reflectionsandexplorations/2015/04/30/academic-freedom-for-whom-institutions-or-individuals/.

53.    Riggle R, Edmondson D, Hansen J. A metaanalysis of the relationship between perceived organizational support and job outcomes: 20 years of research. J Bus Res. 2009;62(10):1027-30.

54.    Alexander H, Lang J. The Long-term Retention and Attrition of U.S. Medical School Faculty. Assoc Am Med Coll. 2008;8(4):1-2.

55.    California University. Effective Policies and Programs for Retention and Advancement of Women in Academia. In: California Uo, editor. 2013.

56.    Leslie D. Policy brief faculty careers and flexible employment. The College of William and Mary and TIAA-CREF Institute Fellow. 2006. Available from: www.tiaa-crefinstitute.org.

57.    Welch J, Wiehe S, Palmer-Smith V, Dankoski M. Flexibility in Faculty Work-Life Policies at Medical Schools in the Big Ten Conference. J Womens Health. 2011;20(5):725-32.

58.    Todd S. Improving Work-Life Balance -What Are Other Countries Doing? Canada: Ottawa : Human Resources and Skills Development; 2004. 56 p.

59.    Bunton SA, Mallon WT. The continued evolution of faculty appointment and tenure policies at U.S. medical schools. Acad Med. 2007;28(3):281-9.

60.    Nezhad MA, Tatari F, Borji A. A comprehensive approach to faculty members’ promotion policies. J Adv Pharm Educ Res. 2019;9(3):119-26.

61.    Vafaiinezhad M, HaidariGorji A, NadiGhara A. Study of Effective Factors on the survival and persistence (preservation and retention) the headquarters staff in deputy of development and resource management of University of Medical Sciences, Mazandaran. J Process Eng. 2016;3(4):13-33.

62.    Salimian S, Shaemi A, Safari A. Determining the Effect of Financial and Nonfinancial Compensation Satisfaction on Employee Engagement with Mediating Role of Justice Perceived Organizational. Manag Stud Dev Evol. 2016;24(78):17-32.

63.    Güngör P. The relationship between reward management system and employee performance with the mediating role of motivation: A quantitative study on global banks. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2011;24:1510-20.


Contact SPER Publications


SPER Publications and Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

HD - 236,
Near The Shri Ram Millenium School,
Sector 135,
Noida-Greater Noida Expressway,
Noida-201301 [Delhi-NCR] India