When available, merit salary increments are targeted to those Faculty members who have made truly meritorious contributions to the mission of the Department. In consultation with the FAC, the Department Chairperson recommends merit awards to the Dean of the College of Business. The criteria and procedures to be used for merit evaluations are described in the Performance and Merit Guidelines Manual. The FAC, in consultation with the Chairperson, has the responsibility for setting the Proportion of Merit Reward, which is to be allocated to each Evaluation Category in keeping with guidelines provided by the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the administration.

 

            The members of the Marketing Department subscribe to the philosophy that, in order to achieve its mission, Faculty members must achieve acceptable standards in scholarship, teaching, and service, and excel in either scholarship or teaching. This section sets forth the procedures to be used to measure the level of performance of the individual Faculty member and to allocate merit increases as rewards for that performance.

 

            The philosophy of the Department regarding merit is summed up in a memo from James P. Louis, Associate Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs, dated February 7, 1991, concerning CBU Faculty Salary Distribution Guidelines and Procedures. Dr. Louis notes that there are gradations in the levels of achievement among Faculty and these should be reflected in merit recommendations. Within a category, the most meritorious Faculty should be awarded appropriately. Thus, a recommendation whereby either the maximum number of Faculty all receive the minimum amount of merit available, or a very few Faculty all receive undifferentiated maximum awards is inappropriate and destructive of the purposes of a merit system that is supplemental to a standard increment for all continuing Faculty. The merit portion of the pay raise is designed to recognize and reward varying levels of meritorious achievement.

 

            Consistent with University policy, in order to be considered for merit, a Faculty member must meet the minimum threshold, set by the Department Chairperson in consultation with the FAC, in both scholarship and teaching. Special consideration will be given to new Faculty members, who may not have been in the Department during the entire period under review.

 

 

 

 

 

1.         Scholarly Activity Evaluations

 

Evaluations of scholarly activity consider both the placement and the quality of the Faculty member's published research. These are assessed using the FAC/Administrative Evaluation of Faculty Scholarly Activity (sample follows) along with the journal and conference proceedings rankings that follow. Should there be a request for re-evaluation, a sample form for this purpose follows.

 

            Each Faculty member should complete the FAC/Administrative Evaluation of Faculty Scholarly Activity for each article accepted for publication (or which has been published) during the merit review period. Each publication may be counted only once toward merit, so if a publication is counted during a review period when it has been accepted for publication, it may not be counted again during a future period after it has been published. If a Faculty member wishes to appeal the ranking of a particular journal or request re-evaluation of a particular article, the FAC will be given the task of evaluating it. In the majority of cases, the points assigned to an article based on the ranking system will accurately reflect the article's contribution for the purposes of the Faculty member's evaluation. In rare cases, there may be evidence that the article's quality or the author's contribution is such that the merit should clearly be adjusted upward or downward. However, this adjustment should be the exception rather than the rule. Note that rankings of journals and conference proceedings should be reviewed annually, and updated as necessary, by the FAC. A faculty member who wishes to change the ranking of a journal should prepare materials supporting the change. These should be disseminated to the FAC, prior to the meeting in which the proposed change will be discussed.

 

1. Scale for Evaluating Scholarly Publications

 

The scale for evaluating Marketing journals reflects four “tiers,” or prestige levels, of publications. While the Department would prefer to have its Faculty publish in Marketing journals, high-quality journals in other areas of business are also recognized. A complete list is provided for Marketing journals, and it is followed by examples for other areas.

 

Tier 1 (Class A) – Best journals in Marketing                                                       60 points

 

            International Journal of Research in Marketing

            Journal of Consumer Research

            Journal of Marketing

            Journal of Marketing Research

            Journal of Retailing

            Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

            Marketing Science

 

 

Tier 2 (Class B) – Respected journals in Marketing                                             20 points

 

Advances in International Marketing

European Journal of Marketing

Industrial Marketing Management

International Journal of Electronic Commerce

Journal of Advertising

Journal of Advertising Research

Journal of Business to Business Marketing

Journal of Consumer Psychology

Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising

Journal of Euromarketing

Journal of Global Marketing

Journal of Interactive Marketing

Journal of International Marketing

Journal of Macromarketing

Journal of Marketing Education

Journal of Marketing Management (UK)

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

Journal of Product Innovation Management

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

Journal of Service Research

Journal of Services Marketing

Journal of the Market Research Society

Marketing Letters

Marketing Theory

Psychology and Marketing

 

Tier 3 (Class C) – Developing journals in Marketing                                           10 points

 

Academy of Marketing Science Review (online)

Academy of Marketing Studies Journal

Advances in Business Marketing & Purchasing

Asian Journal of Marketing

Australasian Marketing Journal

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Logistics

Health Marketing Quarterly

Indian Journal of Marketing

Industrial Marketing & Management Journal

Interactive Marketing

International Journal of Advertising

International Journal of Bank Marketing

International Journal of Electronic Markets

International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Tier 3 (Class C) – Developing journals in Marketing, continued                        10 points

 

International Journal of Retailing

International Marketing Review

Journal of Brand Management

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing

Journal of Consumer Affairs

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Journal of Database Marketing

Journal of Direct Marketing

Journal of Electronic Commerce Research

Journal of Fashion Marketing

Journal of Financial Services Marketing

Journal of Food Products Marketing

Journal of Health Care Marketing

Journal of Hospital Marketing

Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing

Journal of International Consumer Marketing

Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing

Journal of International Marketing & Marketing Research

Journal of Internet Commerce

Journal of Market-Focused Management

Journal of Marketing Channels

Journal of Marketing Communications

Journal of Marketing for Higher Education

Journal of Marketing Management (US)

Journal of Marketing Practice

Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice

Journal of Ministry Marketing & Management

Journal of NonProfit & Public Sector Marketing

Journal of NonProfit & Voluntary Sector Marketing

Journal of Pharmaceutical Marketing & Management

Journal of Product & Brand Management

Journal of Professional Services Marketing

Journal of Promotion Management

Journal of Relationship Marketing

Journal of Restaurant & Foodservice Marketing

Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services

Journal of Segmentation in Marketing

Journal of Strategic Marketing

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing

Journal of Vacation Marketing

Marketing Education Review

Marketing Health Services

Marketing Intelligence & Planning

Tier 3 (Class C) – Developing journals in Marketing, continued                        10 points

 

Marketing Management

Marketing Theory & Applications

Qualitative Market Research

Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce

Research in Consumer Behavior

Services Marketing Quarterly

Sport Marketing Quarterly

 

Tier 4 (Class D) – National Proceedings in Marketing                                         5 points

 

            Academy of Marketing Science Conference Proceedings

Advances in Consumer Research Proceedings           

            AMA Summer Educators' Conference Proceedings

            AMA Winter Educators' Conference Proceedings

 

 

SAMPLE RANKINGS IN OTHER FIELDS OF BUSINESS

 

Tier 1 (Class A) – Best journals in other fields of business – examples               60 points

 

Academy of Management Journal

Academy of Management Review

Administrative Science Quarterly

American Economic Review

American Sociological Review

Econometrica

Harvard Business Review

Journal of Business

Journal of Business & Economic Statistics

Journal of International Business Studies

MIS Quarterly

Operations Research

RAND Journal of Economics

Strategic Management Journal

 

Tier 2 (Class B) – Respected journals in other fields of business – examples     20 points

 

California Management Review

Decision Sciences

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

Interfaces

International Journal of Forecasting

International Journal of Service Industries Management

Tier 2 (Class B) – Respected journals in other fields of business–examples (cont.) 20 points

 

Journal of Applied Psychology

Journal of Business Research

Journal of Economic Psychology

Journal of Forecasting

Journal of Industrial Economics

Journal of Personality & Social Psychology

Journal of World Business

Long Range Planning

Management Science

Service Industries Journal

Sloan Management Review

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

 

Tier 3 (Class C) – Developing journals in other fields of business – examples   10 points

 

American Demographics

Business Horizons

Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly

International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

Journal of Applied Business Research

Journal of Business Communication

Journal of Business Ethics

Journal of Business Forecasting

Journal of Business Logistics

Journal of Business Venturing

Journal of Economics and Business

Journal of Leisure Research

Journal of Supply Chain Management

Journal of Small Business Management

Journal of Travel Research

Managerial and Decision Economics

Public Opinion Quarterly

Quarterly Review of Economics & Business

Social Psychological Quarterly

 

Tier 4 (Class D) – National Proceedings in other fields of business - examples    5 points

 

            Academy of International Business Proceedings

            Decision Sciences Institute Proceedings

            INFORMS Conference Proceedings

 

 

 

2. Evaluating Research Support Activities

Contribution	General Description	Example
High Level	High Level Grant w/   Direct Dept Benefits Editorship of a National Publication	Grant over $5,000       Editor for a marketing journal or AMA Proceedings
Medium Level                   Low Level	Medium Level Grant w/   Direct Dept. Benefits Significant Involvement   with a National   Publication Significant Involvement   with a National   Conference     Low Level Grant-   Direct Dept. Benefits Significant Involvement with   Regional Publication Significant Involvement with   Regional Conference	Grant over $2,000   Editorial Board of a major marketing journal   Track Chairperson at National AMA Conference       Grant under $2000   Editorial Board of any marketing journal Track Chairperson at Society for Marketing Advances

2.         Teaching Performance

 

            A Faculty member's teaching performance is presently measured using information from the Kent State University Student Evaluation of Instruction forms. Specifically, two items from the Student Evaluation of Instruction form (DP-011 3/89) have been selected to use to evaluate teaching performance. These items are (20) Overall instructor's teaching, and (21) Overall course.  However, the standard evaluation form is under review by the University, and if it changes, other suitable items will be selected by the FAC. Student responses to the selected items will be used to complete the Student Evaluation of Teaching Performance (sample follows).

 

            The FAC will also consider alternative measures of teaching effectiveness, in addition to the course evaluations. Faculty who wish to have additional information evaluated for merit purposes may summarize in a memo to the FAC such contributions as:

• comparison of course content to the content specified by the Basic Data Sheet
• number of new course preparations over a merit period
• number of different courses taught
• size of sections taught
• involvement in teaching development programs
• design of custom course materials
• mentoring of new teachers in a particular course
• teaching awards or other recognition.

 

3.         Evaluation of Service Activities

 

            The mission of the Department is enhanced by Faculty who engage in research support activities. Such effort is documented using the Request for FAC/Administrative Evaluation of Faculty Research Support and Service Activities form (sample follows). The Faculty member lists and describes all relevant activities on the form, and the Chairperson evaluates each activity using the Evaluation of Research Support Activities (sample follows). If there is disagreement between the Chairperson’s and the Faculty member's assessment of the activity, the FAC is asked to evaluate the activity.

 

            The mission of the Department cannot be performed without Faculty providing a broad range of other service activities. Each Faculty member uses the Request for FAC/Administrative Evaluation of Faculty Research Support and Service Activities form (sample follows) to list and describe service activities, and the Chairperson evaluates each activity using the Evaluation of Other Service Activities (sample follows). If there is disagreement between the Chairperson’s and the Faculty member's assessment of the activity, the FAC is asked to evaluate the activity.

 

1. Evaluating Other Service Activities

Contribution   High Level                           Medium Level                                 Low Level

Description   Chairperson for:   a) A University, College, or University Committee   b) A Professional or Public Service Organization   Faculty Advisor to a Student Organization             Member of:   a) A University, College, or University Committee   b) A Professional or Public Service Organization   Faculty Advisor to a Student Organization         Speaking engagements         Informal Student Advising, Informal Public Speaking, Attendance at Professional Meetings

Criteria/Example   High Level of Identifiable Accomplishments and Personal/Departmental Recognition and Visibility     High Level of Active Involvement as Evidenced by Regular/Frequent Meetings/Activities and Extensive Time/Work Commitments     Moderate Level of Identifiable Accomplishments and Personal/Departmental Recognition and Visibility   Moderate Level of Active Involvement as Evidence by Frequent Meetings/Activities and Substantial Time/Work Commitments   Moderate Level to High Level of Visibility for the Department     Service Activities and Other Involvement Requiring a Minimal Amount of Time and Effort

 

            The Department Chair uses the information described above to calculate recommended merit salary increases for each Department Faculty member. Each member of the FAC receives a summary report indicating suggested increases for all members of the Faculty, broken down into two categories: (1) scholarly activities and (2) teaching and service activities. The FAC will then discuss the proposed merit increases and advise the Department Chair accordingly.

           The Chairperson should also inform the FAC of the overall dollar amount of the Department’s merit raise pool, and the amount to be allocated to each category. (University guidelines historically have indicated that 50% of the total is to be allocated to meritorious scholarship and 50% to meritorious teaching and service.) This total is divided by the number of Faculty members, to calculate the average merit dollars available for each Faculty member before considering individual contributions in each category. The average amount is modified by the ratio of the Faculty member's overall mean category evaluation to the Department mean, to establish the recommended merit pay raise.