The faculty affairs landscape has changed significantly in recent years, with shifting institutional and faculty needs, increased calls for transparency and visibility, and evolving metrics of success. In addition, this field is actively growing and expected to take on more and more responsibility to support the ever-growing needs of faculty and institutions, but there is a desperate lack of centralized resources and associations for faculty affairs professionals.
To better understand the faculty affairs landscape, Interfolio joined forces with the Higher Education Recruitment Consortium (HERC) to survey 177 faculty affairs professionals at a range of public and private institutions of varying sizes across the country. The results were detailed in the State of Faculty Affairs: Insights From the 2024 Interfolio & HERC Survey webinar, which is available to access on demand.
Top Faculty Affairs Challenges
Faculty affairs departments are facing significant challenges that impact both day-to-day operations and long-term goals. The two most pressing issues that were reported by survey respondents were budget constraints (60%) and low morale and/or trust between faculty and administration (52%). Tight budgets often mean difficult decisions on campuses, but hiring, faculty salaries, program funding, and professional development are all integral to having a solid and robust faculty workforce as well as an effective and resourced faculty affairs office. Institutions have to find ways to navigate these challenges—there’s growing pressure to do more with less, but that places a strain on morale, especially as workloads are increasing without that corresponding boost in resources. And when morale is low, faculty can feel disconnected from the institution, which can lead to retention issues. It’s crucial for institutions to address these challenges with a balance of strategic financial planning and fostering stronger relationships between faculty and administration.
In terms of budget priorities, the leader amongst survey respondents was faculty development/professional development (36%). However, investments in technology solutions and additional staff followed closely behind, with these two priorities tied at 30%. Survey respondents from public four-year institutions were more likely than those from private four-year institutions to say that insufficient/outdated technology is a problem, but those at private four-year institutions were still just as likely to prioritize tech investments.
Survey respondents also noted the top barriers to implementing new technology on campus, with nearly half stating that budget was the key challenge (46%). Looking beyond budget, 21% of respondents said the lack of staff to support the transition was a major hurdle, while 15% noted that colleagues’ willingness to change was an obstacle. Simply buying the technology isn’t enough—institutions need adequate staff to support implementation as well as buy-in from all stakeholders to ensure success.
Why is this so important? Another key finding of the survey is the increasing pressure of collecting and managing faculty data. In today’s higher education landscape, faculty affairs professionals are expected to track a wide range of faculty activities across teaching, research, and service. In fact, 47% of the faculty affairs professionals we surveyed agreed that they are under increased pressure to demonstrate faculty members’ work. However, 58% of survey respondents agreed that collecting and managing data about faculty and their work has become more challenging in the last two years. This reflects the growing complexity of faculty roles as well as the need for robust solutions to accurately capture and maintain this data. Investing in the right technology can streamline this task, reducing the administrative burden on faculty and staff alike.
Addressing Institutional Retention
Turnover can be tough in all industries, but a strong succession plan can help keep productivity and morale up. Unfortunately, only 19% of survey respondents reported a strong succession plan at their institution for turnover among faculty affairs staff or leadership, revealing an alarming lack of readiness amongst faculty affairs offices. Failure to prepare can lead directly to organizational fatigue as remaining employees feel the strain of constant change and additional responsibilities in the interim.
In addition to the survey, HERC ran a LinkedIn poll asking higher education managers whether they had seen higher-than-normal employee turnover over the past six months, with 68% confirming they had. When comparing the number of those seeing turnover to the number of those who feel prepared to address this turnover, it’s clear that institutions need to take action. Whether it’s systematizing procedures for uniformity, cross-training employees in different roles, developing current talent for leadership roles, or a combination of these approaches, ensuring faculty affairs has the resources it needs to support continuity is crucial.
The faculty affairs professionals we surveyed indicated they experience the most retention challenges with their tenure-track, pre-tenure faculty (31%), with non-tenure-track faculty following at 25%. Not surprisingly, the majority of respondents (81%) said that salary increases would have the greatest impact on increasing faculty retention. However, that’s not the only way to attract and retain top talent. The next two factors chosen by respondents were less administration burden on faculty (47%) and more equitable workloads (46%). These are areas where the faculty affairs office can have a significant impact, streamlining processes for faculty to lighten their load and give them time back to focus on their teaching, research, and service efforts.
Promoting Faculty Engagement
Institutional success relies on an engaged faculty, and the faculty affairs professionals we surveyed shared how they approach faculty development at their institutions. When asked about mentorship programming, 49% of respondents said their institution offers both informal and formal programming, with the latter meaning standardized guidelines and expectations are involved. One-third (33%) said they offer informal mentorship programming only, while 14% offer only formal programming. Just 3% of respondents indicated that they don’t offer any mentorship programming. While informal mentorship offers flexibility, formal programs provide equitable access, structured career development, and measurable outcomes, which can contribute to increased retention, job satisfaction, and institutional success.
During the webinar, Dr. Milagros Rivera, Director of Faculty Engagement and Well-Being at George Mason University, noted the value of offering a variety of mentoring approaches for faculty members. “People feel a lot more supported if they’re working with people in their own disciplines,” she shared. “But there are some things we can do at the central level in the Office of Faculty Affairs to support them in a broader range of competencies and skills that they can develop as faculty members that are irrespective of their discipline.”
So, how can today’s faculty affairs offices leverage technology to improve faculty engagement? More than one-third of respondents (37%) said technology could be used to increase communication and transparency between faculty and administrators, followed closely by identifying areas where faculty need support (34%). About one in five respondents (21%) believe leveraging technology to showcase faculty work could help increase engagement. Interestingly, this data aligns with the faculty survey conducted by Interfolio last year. Some faculty feel that the full range of their work isn’t reflected in RPT processes and want the ability to showcase their work more effectively with web profiles.
Faculty Affairs Institutional Readiness
Interfolio’s 25-year history of closely collaborating with and serving leadership in the faculty affairs space has given us extensive insight into both the gaps that exist and opportunities for improvement. Building on conversations with faculty affairs professionals at a variety of institutions across the country, Interfolio has launched a new framework to support success.
The Faculty Affairs Institutional Readiness (FAIR) model represents five major themes of faculty affairs work, designed to support excellence in faculty affairs offices of all sizes. The accompanying self-assessment tool can help your faculty affairs office reflect on best practices across these five main components:
- Scope and Policy
- Personnel
- Financial Sustainability
- Technology
- Faculty Development
After taking the assessment, you’ll be able to see how your peers at other institutions have responded and download our discussion guide to bring the conversation to your own campus. We encourage all faculty affairs professionals to take the self-assessment, identify priorities for their office, and determine any areas for improvement.