REVIEW AND REAPPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS
University of Nebraska - Lincoln
[Updated July 27, 2001 to incorporate changes approved on 9/9/96]
- Policy
It is the policy of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to conduct an annual review of each incumbent administrative officer. In addition, there will be a formal cumulative performance review at intervals not to exceed five years for the purpose of providing information to improve performance, recognize and reward outstanding performance, and determine whether the incumbent's administrative appointment should be continued. These reviews shall include not only the administrator’s record in achieving the goals of the specific unit, but also the administrator’s record in contributing to campus and systemwide goals, particularly increasing the diversity of the university community. This policy shall apply to vice chancellors, deans, department chairs or heads, and directors who supervise faculty and who report to the chancellor or to a vice chancellor. The chancellor may make this policy applicable to other administrative officers holding positions equivalent to those listed above.- Annual Reviews
Each administrative officer shall be reviewed annually by his or her immediate supervisor. The supervisor shall determine the nature and manner of conducting the review. - Cumulative Performance Reviews
Administrative positions differ in scope and responsibility and the procedures for cumulative performance reviews will vary accordingly. The cumulative performance review shall be conducted in accordance with the following principles, and standards of administrative performance delineated in the UNL Bylaws. These principles and standards will also apply to units other than academic units to the extent appropriate. The principles are:- The supervisor for each administrative officer subject to this policy shall establish the review period of each incumbent. Ordinarily the review period shall be five years, but review periods for initial appointments may be a shorter period. Individuals reporting to the incumbent should be made aware of the review period. In preparation for the review, the incumbent shall prepare a report to the supervisor of (a) the incumbent's past and current objectives and the success in achieving these objectives, and (b) the incumbent's future objectives and proposed plan for achieving these objectives. The report or a summary of the report will be made available to the faculty, students, and staff of the unit and to such others in a position to observe, evaluate, and offer information relevant to the incumbent's performance.
- At the beginning of the administrative review, the supervisor will appoint a faculty representative of the incumbent’s unit to coordinate the review of the incumbent. The coordinator is charged with maintaining strict confidentiality throughout the process. Information and comments regarding the incumbent's performance shall be solicited from the faculty, students, and staff of the unit and from such others in a position to observe, evaluate, and offer information relevant to the incumbent's performance. Each person shall be encouraged, on the basis of those aspects of performance that they have directly observed, to suggest how the incumbent could improve performance, to give examples of outstanding performance, and to comment on whether the incumbent should be retained in his or her administrative office. In addition, the supervisor shall invite a representative committee of faculty[1] from the incumbent's unit to provide a written analysis of the incumbent's performance.
- As part of the administrative review process, the supervisor and coordinator will review the information received from all sources and prepare a summary of the information obtained in the review and of any other issues pertaining to administrative performance that both wish to address. This summary will include areas of accomplishment as well as areas of concern and will be discussed at a meeting with the representative committee from the incumbent’s unit. Personnel matters of a confidential nature will not be transmitted, but matters relating to professional job performance and management that do not embody personnel matters will be transmitted to the representative committee from the incumbent’s unit. (Nothing in this section shall require the supervisor and the coordinator to disclose the identity of any individual providing information or any information that may be confidential.)
In addition, if the incumbent is reappointed, the supervisor shall discuss with the committee the goals and expectations established with the incumbent to be accomplished during the incumbent's next term. In the event that the incumbent is not reappointed, the supervisor shall discuss with the committee the supervisor's expectations for the incumbent's successor and the characteristics to be sought in the successor.
- Annual Reviews
The evaluation and the decision whether or not to reappoint the incumbent to his or her administrative appointment is the responsibility of the supervisor. Reappointment of the incumbent following the periodic review requires a letter from the supervisor formalizing the action. The individuals who were invited to participate in the review will also be informed of the action.
Background for Policy
The Bylaws of the Board of Regents establish for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln a system of shared governance and within that system delegates to various administrative officers the responsibility to administer the University. Administration is enhanced when clear objectives are established and the performance of administrative officers is measured against those goals and objectives.The Bylaws of the Board of Regents and the UNL Bylaws place primary responsibility for the review and reappointment of an administrative officer on his or her immediate supervisor. The Bylaws of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln establish standards of administrative performance (UNL Bylaw 2.1.2) and provide that administrative officers of the campus "shall be appointed for a stated term" (UNL Bylaw 2.2.2), and that such officer shall "undergo annual evaluations of performance conducted by the officer's immediate supervisor" (UNL Bylaw 2.3.2.1). In addition, UNL Bylaw 2.3.2.2 requires each administrative program to be evaluated every five years and goes on to provide: "Normally, this evaluation should occur in the final year of the term specified in the appointment of the administrator."
UNL has implemented these Bylaws by conducting annual reviews of administrative officers. Although annual reviews provide the opportunity for frequent exchange regarding an administrative officer's short-term performance, administrative success or failure in achieving longer-term objectives can only be measured over a longer period. Thus, the addition of a more intense review of an administrative officer's performance is appropriate when it is necessary to decide whether that officer should be reappointed to an additional term.
1Ordinarily, in the review of a dean or department chair or head, the proper committee will be the elected faculty executive or advisory committee that normally acts on behalf of the faculty of that unit. For administrative officers with campus-wide responsibility, the proper committee is the Academic Senate Executive Committee or a standing advisory committee in the unit. ↩