جستجوی کار و انتخاب توسط حسابداران دانشگاهی: نو و انتقال دانشکده
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|26527||2002||18 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||7411 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Accounting Education, Volume 20, Issue 2, Spring 2002, Pages 67–84
This study examines the factors accounting faculty consider most important in accepting a certain academic position and their level of satisfaction that they selected the correct school. Also, information is obtained on how interviews with universities were obtained and conducted. A questionnaire was sent to two groups of faculty: new PhDs accepting their first academic employment and also faculty moving to a new school. Differences were found in importance of factors in job selection between new and relocating faculty, those accepting positions at doctoral vs. non-doctoral granting schools, and males and females. The extent of job search and methods of obtaining interviews differed between those relocating voluntarily and those leaving involuntarily. This research has implications both for new and mobile faculty and institutions interested in attracting the best faculty.
The primary purpose of this study is to empirically examine which factors are important in the selection of academic positions by accounting faculty. Although other studies have explored this question, several factors provide motivation for the current study. First, the limited amount of research performed in this area has used different methodologies, and thus the results obtained and conclusions reached vary considerably. Second, the academic accounting market has changed dramatically over the last 10 years. Decreasing enrollments, budget cuts and an increase in doctoral programs have increased tenure requirements and put a greater premium on academic accounting positions. Third, the demographics of our profession have changed as well. Increasing numbers of women and minorities are entering the academic accounting profession. Additionally, the number of new PhDs entering the job market has dropped dramatically. As recently as the late 1980s over 200 new graduates were joining the profession yearly. This number dropped to 152 in 1996 (Hasselback, 2000–2001) and continues to fall. Another dimension affecting the job market is greater involuntary faculty turnover. As tenure requirements increase, more faculty may not receive tenure and may even fail third year reviews. This could lead to more experienced faculty competing with new PhDs for Assistant Professor positions. Thus, previous research may no longer reflect current conditions. Fourth, we also empirically examine gender differences in the selection of new academic positions. Other studies have not investigated these differences. Fifth, we use multiple forms of analysis using both quantitative and qualitative data based on actual decisions. A secondary purpose is to obtain quantitative and qualitative data about the interviewing process, which has received little attention in previous research. We believe that this study provides additional evidence in the literature investigating academic accounting employment. An increasing percentage of females is entering the market. Previous research, with small percentages of females in their samples, did not investigate gender differences. We find evidence of gender differences for factors important in job selection. Additionally, we simultaneously study both relocaters and new PhDs using actual rather than the hypothetical decision used in many previous studies. Major differences emerge between academic relocaters and those seeking their first position. We also examine the extent of job search, in terms of number of schools contacted by an applicant. This study is the first to divide relocaters into those leaving voluntarily and those leaving involuntarily. The extent of job search also differs among types of applicants. In addition to these contributions to the academic literature, we believe our findings should be of practical interest to new PhDs seeking positions, relocating faculty, and recruiting universities. By studying factors of importance as well as satisfaction we identify issues that new faculty, in particular, may need to consider in selecting their first academic position. This study should help academic job seekers focus on factors which are important to others in the same group (based on new or relocating faculty, type of school, and gender). University administrators should be interested in the importance of factors in selecting a position as well as leaving a institution, in order to attract and retain desired faculty members. Also, awareness of the gender differences found in this study may help those institutions that are trying to increase the diversity of their faculty. Finally, we provide data on means of obtaining and conducting interviews that should be of interest to new hires, relocaters, and university administrators. Both groups of faculty may benefit by knowing techniques that others have successfully used to obtain interviews. Understanding factors leading to applicant dissatisfaction with the interviewing process may help prospective faculty know what to expect and may provide universities with information on how to improve the process and better attract good faculty. This research views job search and selection as a process involving reasons for leaving previous employment, obtaining and conducting interviews, and reasons for selecting a particular position. To our knowledge no previous accounting research has looked simultaneously at all of these aspects of the process. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we review the relevant literature on accounting faculty mobility. The third section discusses the research methodology used. The fourth section presents the results. Finally, we provide a discussion of findings, conclusions, limitations and implications for future research.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Some of our results reflect significant changes in the academic accounting market. The ratio of relocaters to new faculty appears to be increasing. In 1996, about 1.15 relocaters took a position for each new PhD but by 1997–1998, this ratio had increased to almost 2 to 1. Another significant change is that a much larger percentage of females is entering the current job market. In our study, almost 40% of new PhD respondents are female. Previous research has largely ignored gender differences because of the small percentages of female accounting faculty. While most of the top factors are similar between genders, we find a few important significant gender differences in our study. Males tend to be more focused on salary issues than females. Females are more concerned with job opportunities for their spouse than males. We also examined differences between faculty going to doctoral programs compared to non-doctoral programs. Research support factors are more important for those going to doctoral programs. Likelihood of obtaining tenure and geographic location are more important for those going to non-doctoral programs. One of the highest ranked factors in job selection for both new PhDs and relocating faculty was spouse's evaluation of the area. In narrative information related to interviewing, respondents expressed concern that most institutions do not include spouses in campus visits. Universities that invite spouses might increase the chance of obtaining desirable candidates for a position. One of the reasons this area may have increased in importance may be due to the change from a seller's market to a buyer's market for faculty jobs at the end of the 1980s. Pre-1990, a job candidate may have been able to apply for jobs only in the areas that the couples initially agreed. Post-1990, job candidates may have to be more flexible in initially applying for positions making spousal involvement in selecting offers more important. Reasons for leaving previous employment are reported. This may help universities deal with common complaints by faculty and improve conditions. Our reported areas of dissatisfaction with the interviewing process provide information useful for universities to attract good faculty. We find some evidence that suggests a tightening of the job market. Respondents in our study reported fewer on-campus visits and job offers than previous research (Ostrowski, 1986). Compared with Greenawalt and Saftner (1991) we find a much smaller percentage of relocating faculty received promotions (19% compared with 37%). Relocating faculty were also more likely to go to primarily teaching oriented schools. Several limitations exist in this research. One arises from using self-reported data to divide relocating faculty into those leaving voluntarily vs. involuntarily. However, to encourage truthful responses, subjects were assured that all replies would be held in confidence. This research did not look at why certain job search techniques were favored (unless the respondent chose to write comments) or how satisfied the respondent was with each of the methods used. Neither did it examine psychological factors, such as self-esteem, which might affect job search. These limitations somewhat restrict the ability of the research to guide behavior by new PhDs or potentially relocating faculty. The fact that the respondents were successful applicants who were generally satisfied with their new positions, however, provides some indication that their behavior may be instructive. An additional limitation worth noting is that a high percentage of respondents went to more teaching oriented schools, which may affect the generalizability of the results. Several areas exist for future research. Two other demographic variables in the academic population could be explored: visiting faculty and international differences. In this study we did not include those accepting visiting positions. However, this represents an important part of the academic workforce that may become more common as tenure requirements increase. Second, anecdotal evidence suggests that more opportunities for international positions are becoming available. We are not aware of previous research investigating these differences. Finally, research could examine the extent of the subjects' knowledge at the time of accepting a job offer, for example how well they got to know other faculty, the real likelihood of tenure, the true availability of research grants and the actual job opportunities for spouses.