Category: CUPA-HR Research

  • The Top Predictor of Higher Ed Employee Retention May Surprise You – CUPA-HR

    The Top Predictor of Higher Ed Employee Retention May Surprise You – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | September 12, 2023

    In 2022-23, turnover of higher ed employees was the highest in five years. A new report from CUPA-HR explores the issue of higher ed employee retention and the factors that impact retention.

    The CUPA-HR 2023 Higher Education Employee Retention Survey analyzed data from 4,782 higher ed employees — administrators, professionals and non-exempt staff, with faculty excluded — from 529 institutions. It found that 33% of higher ed employees surveyed answered they were “very likely” or “likely” to look for new employment opportunities in the next year. More than half (56%) of employees are at least somewhat likely to search for a new job in the coming year.

    Top Reasons Higher Ed Employees Are Looking for a New Job

    According to the findings, respondents say that pay is the number one reason they’re looking for a new job. Other influential reasons are an opportunity to work remotely, desire for a promotion or more responsibility, and the need for a more flexible work schedule.

    But while pay is the top concern mentioned by employees, retention challenges are more complex.

    Strongest Predictors of Retention

    Digging deeper into the data, the strongest predictors of retention are factors related to job satisfaction and well-being. Only 58% of higher ed employees are generally satisfied with their jobs. Of the 16 aspects of job satisfaction and well-being the survey measured, the three that have the most impact on retention are:

    • Recognition for Contributions
    • Being Valued by Others at Work
    • Having a Sense of Belonging

    Only 59% of respondents say they receive regular verbal recognition for doing good work. The good news is that programs, training and policies that increase employee satisfaction in these areas can make a significant impact on retention without necessarily breaking the budget.

    Three Things You Can Do

    Employees are not necessarily planning to flee higher ed. Most job seekers will be looking within higher ed, and nearly half will be looking within their own institution, indicating that it’s not too late to implement retention strategies. Here are three things you can do to assess and address job satisfaction:

    1. Read the Report. The CUPA-HR 2023 Higher Education Employee Retention Survey provides not only data but also a model for understanding higher ed retention. (Looking for an overview of report findings? Check out our press release.)
    2. Explore CUPA-HR Resources. Here are several that focus on aspects of job satisfaction:
    1. Plan Next Steps. Share the report or press release with leaders on your campus. Determine areas where your institution could strengthen career development and implement training to increase job satisfaction.

     



    Source link

  • Managing a Multi-State Workforce: Key Findings From the CUPA-HR Survey and a Public University’s Hybrid Approach – CUPA-HR

    Managing a Multi-State Workforce: Key Findings From the CUPA-HR Survey and a Public University’s Hybrid Approach – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | April 19, 2023

    As higher ed institutions face pressure to fill open positions and offer more flexible work opportunities, many are responding by recruiting and hiring employees who live and work in a state different from where their institution’s primary campus is located. CUPA-HR’s Multi-State Workforce Survey was developed to better understand institutions’ policies, practices and challenges related to out-of-state workers.

    Notable findings:

    • 89% of responding institutions employ out-of-state workers.
    • The most common types of out-of-state workers are adjunct/part-time faculty and salaried/exempt staff.
    • On median, institutions employ out-of-state workers from 8 states.
    • Most institutions have restricted policies for both recruiting and hiring out-of-state workers.
    • Of the one third of institutions who avoid hiring from certain states, the most common states institutions avoid hiring from were California, New York, Washington and Colorado.
    • Many institutions provide salary ranges on job postings, but most do not adjust salaries based on location.

    Despite the challenges of a multi-state workforce, excluding out-of-state workers can decrease the quality of the candidate pool and may cause institutions to miss out on top talent. Institutions pursuing, or considering pursuing, out-of-state workers may want to look at Clemson University’s hybrid approach to managing a multi-state workforce.

    Charged by senior leadership to explore options for out-of-state employment, Clemson University’s HR team, led by Chief Human Resources Officer Ale Kennedy, convened a cross-campus workgroup that reached out to several schools about their out-of-state work approaches. After reviewing the data, the workgroup recommended that in-house HR manage the green or “easy” states and outsource the more challenging states in order to minimize risk. To learn more about Clemson’s approach — and the full findings from the Multi-State Workforce Survey — be sure to watch CUPA-HR’s recent webinar “The State of the Multi-State Workforce: Employment Practices and Challenges.”



    Source link

  • Pay Increases for Higher Ed Employees Sharply Improve, But Still Fall Short of Inflation Rate – CUPA-HR

    Pay Increases for Higher Ed Employees Sharply Improve, But Still Fall Short of Inflation Rate – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | April 3, 2023

    New research from CUPA-HR has found that although employees across the higher education workforce saw the most substantial pay raises in 2022-23 than in the past several years, they are still being paid less than they were in 2019-20 in inflation-adjusted dollars.

    Some of the key findings from an analysis of CUPA-HR’s higher ed workforce salary survey data from 2016 to 2023:

    • This academic year, raises for higher ed employees were the largest seen in the past seven years, and all position types (administrators, professionals, staff and faculty) received an increase of at least 1.11 percentage points compared to the previous year.
    • Tenure-track and non-tenure-track teaching faculty continue to receive the smallest pay increases of any higher ed employee category. In 2022-23, tenure-track faculty saw a median pay increase of 2.9 percent and non-tenure-track faculty saw an increase of 3.2 percent. Tenure-track faculty salary increases have not kept pace with inflation since at least 2015, and non-tenure-track salary increases last met or exceeded inflation in 2016-17, meaning full-time faculty in general continue to be paid less every year in inflation-adjusted dollars.
    • Staff, which is typically the lowest-paid category of higher ed employees, saw the biggest raises this academic year at 5.3 percent (up from 2.9 percent in 2021-22).

    Explore this data and more in CUPA-HR’s newest interactive graphic.

    CUPA-HR Research

    CUPA-HR is the recognized authority on compensation surveys for higher education, with its workforce surveys designed by higher ed HR professionals for higher ed HR professionals and other campus leaders. CUPA-HR has been collecting data on the higher ed workforce for more than 50 years, and we maintain one of the largest workforce databases in existence. CUPA-HR also publishes numerous research publications and interactive graphics highlighting trends and issues around higher ed workforce planning, pay equity, representation of women and racial/ethnic minorities and more. Learn more about CUPA-HR research.



    Source link

  • CUPA-HR Data Highlights Trends in Representation and Pay Equity in the Higher Education Workforce, and the News Is Mixed – CUPA-HR

    CUPA-HR Data Highlights Trends in Representation and Pay Equity in the Higher Education Workforce, and the News Is Mixed – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | March 1, 2023

    When it comes to representation and pay equity for women and people of color in the higher education workforce, colleges and universities have frequently struggled to make meaningful progress. Through several new interactive graphics representing years of research, CUPA-HR shines a light on the progress that has been made and the disparities that persist. These graphics represent data from CUPA-HR’s four signature higher ed workforce surveys — Administrators, Faculty, Professionals, and Staff — through 2022.

    Administrators

    While the proportion of people of color in higher ed administrator positions has grown steadily over the last 10 years, these increases have not kept pace with the rate at which minorities are obtaining graduate degrees. In 2022, people of color made up 18.2 percent of administrators, up from 12.9 percent in 2012.

    The data also show that pay gaps for women administrators of all races/ethnicities are consistent across the past 10 years and notably wide. Pay inequity is particularly egregious for women administrators of color (with the exception of Asian women). Men of color, on the other hand, have been paid salaries equitable to or greater than those of White men in recent years.

    The Administrators in Higher Education Survey collects data on administrator positions that manage a higher ed institution or a division within it.

    See the Administrators Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics, as well as data broken out by CEO, provost and chief HR officer.

    Faculty

    There are two notable findings in faculty composition. First, more women are represented in non-tenure-track than in tenure-track faculty. Second, for each tenure status and with each increase in rank, the proportions of women and faculty of color decrease. This means that women are over-represented in the lowest-paying and lowest-ranking positions. This remains the case despite the fact that the proportion of women and faculty of color have increased slightly at each rank over the past five years.

    Pay gaps for women faculty, regardless of tenure status or rank, continue to persist, particularly at the rank of professor. These gaps are most notable for women of color. Pay gaps at other ranks have narrowed over time, particularly for tenure-track faculty. Importantly, the factor that most impacts faculty pay is promotion to a higher rank. Often, the only significant increases in salary happen with these promotions. These data show that the only group that has greater representation with each increase in rank is that of White male faculty, and this pattern has persisted over time.

    The Faculty in Higher Education Survey collects data on tenure-track faculty positions and non-tenure-track teaching faculty positions.

    See the Faculty Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

    Professionals

    Women’s representation has increased across all professionals’ positions since 2017, and in 2022, women represented more than 60 percent of higher ed professionals. This change is due to slight increases in representation of women of color since 2017. In 2022, representation of people of color was 24 percent overall, with the highest percentage among human resources professionals (34 percent) and diversity and equal opportunity professionals (33 percent).

    In 2022, women were consistently paid less than White men, a pattern that has worsened since 2017. However, men of color were paid more equitably in 2022 compared to previous years.

    The Professionals in Higher Education Survey collects data on positions in specific functional areas in higher ed institutions, such as academic or student services, that usually require a baccalaureate degree.

    See the Professionals Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

    Staff

    Staff employees have a higher representation of people of color than any other higher ed employee group. This is notable in that these are the lowest-paying positions in higher ed. In 2022, women of color represented about 19 percent of all higher ed staff, and men of color represented about 13 percent of all higher ed staff. These numbers have increased since 2017, though modestly. Skilled craft employees were the least racially diverse group, as 80 percent were White men, a finding that has persisted across the past six years. Notably, skilled craft staff are among the highest-paid staff positions.

    Since 2017, women in staff positions have been paid consistently and considerably less than White men in staff positions, a pattern that has worsened over time, particularly for women in office and clerical positions. Men of color were paid more equitably in 2022 when compared to 2017.

    The Staff in Higher Education Survey collects data on positions that are generally non-exempt and do not require a college degree.

    See the Staff Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

    CUPA-HR Research

    CUPA-HR is the recognized authority on compensation surveys for higher education, with its workforce surveys designed by higher ed HR professionals for higher ed HR professionals and other campus leaders. CUPA-HR has been collecting data on the higher ed workforce for more than 50 years, and we maintain one of the largest workforce databases in existence. CUPA-HR also publishes numerous research publications and interactive graphics highlighting trends and issues around higher ed workforce planning, pay equity, representation of women and racial/ethnic minorities and more. Learn more about CUPA-HR research.



    Source link

  • New Research Finds Higher Ed Institutions Are at Risk of Losing Supervisors to Other Employers – CUPA-HR

    New Research Finds Higher Ed Institutions Are at Risk of Losing Supervisors to Other Employers – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | January 11, 2023

    As previous research from CUPA-HR has shown, America’s colleges and universities are in the midst of a talent crisis, as many employees are considering other employment opportunities due to a number of factors. As a follow-up to the initial findings of CUPA-HR’s 2022 Higher Education Employee Retention Survey, CUPA-HR has released new findings focused specifically on those in supervisory roles, and the data show that many supervisors are overwhelmed, under-resourced, and struggling to fill positions and maintain morale.

    The newly published report, The CUPA-HR 2022 Higher Education Employee Retention Survey: Focus on Supervisors, explores supervisors’ likelihood of looking for new employment, their current challenges and working environments, and which job aspects specific to supervisors are associated with their retention. The report analyzes data from the 3,815 higher ed administrators, professionals and non-exempt staff, most (57 percent) of whom were supervisors, who responded to CUPA-HR’s 2022 Higher Education Employee Retention Survey.

    Findings

    Higher ed supervisors are looking for other employment opportunities, and less than half would seek new opportunities at their current institution. Nearly two in five (36 percent) supervisors indicate they are likely to look for other employment in the next 12 months, and only 40 percent say they would seek job opportunities at their current institution. The most common cited reason for seeking other employment is pay.

    Most higher ed supervisors work long hours and have absorbed more duties since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data show that supervisors are more likely than non-supervisors to work additional hours. Fewer than half (47 percent) of non-supervisors work more hours than what is considered full-time. However, 89 percent of area supervisors and 76 percent of other supervisors work more hours per week than what is considered full-time at their institution. Additionally, supervisors are more likely than non-supervisors to agree that they have absorbed additional responsibilities of other staff who have left the institution since the onset of COVID-19. Supervisors are also more likely than non-supervisors to report that they experienced an increase in job expectations since the start of the pandemic.

    Filling positions and maintaining morale are supervisors’ top challenges. As shown in the figure below, almost two-thirds (63 percent) of supervisors indicated they find filling positions very challenging and over half (54 percent) found maintaining staff morale very challenging.

    Higher ed supervisors report a lack of adequate training and support. Only three in five supervisors agree that they have resources and support in their supervisory role. Less than half (46 percent) agree that they have been provided with adequate management training for their supervisory role. However, when supervisors have more resources and support in their supervisory roles, more power to advocate for their staff, more power to allow flexible schedules, and more power to allow their staff to work remotely, they are less likely to seek other employment.

    Implications of Supervisor Turnover and How to Combat It

    Turnover in any role can impact an institution due to loss of talent, institutional knowledge and team or interdepartmental rapport. However, turnover in a supervisor role has more far-reaching implications. Supervisor turnover also impacts direct reports, who must adjust to a new supervisor and may need to adapt to new team priorities and vision. Loss of supervisors also equates to a loss of leaders who are key to succession plans.

    In light of what the data show, there are several actions higher ed institutions can take to keep their supervisors:

    • Provide supervisors with resources and support in their capacity as supervisors, particularly around filling empty positions and managing staff morale.
    • Ensure supervisors have the ability, knowledge and resources to advocate for their staff.
    • Give supervisors more autonomy to determine their staff’s working arrangements, as the data show that supervisors who have more power to allow their staff to work remotely and have flexible schedules are less likely to seek other employment.
    • Commit to reducing supervisor workload.
    • If possible, raise salaries for supervisors (but not at the expense of non-supervisors).

    For a deeper look into the data, read the full report.

    Note: In the findings, “area supervisors” refer to those supervisors who are the top-most leaders in their department, units or areas (self-identified in the survey; 26 percent of respondents). “Other supervisors” are those who self-identified as having at least one direct report but were not the top-most leader in their department (31 percent of respondents). “Non-supervisors” are those employees who have no direct reports (43 percent of respondents).

    CUPA-HR Research

    CUPA-HR is the recognized authority on compensation surveys for higher education, with its workforce surveys designed by higher ed HR professionals for higher ed HR professionals and other campus leaders. CUPA-HR has been collecting data on the higher ed workforce for more than 50 years, and we maintain one of the largest workforce databases in existence. CUPA-HR also publishes numerous research publications and interactive graphics highlighting trends and issues around higher ed workforce planning, pay equity, representation of women and racial/ethnic minorities and more. Learn more about CUPA-HR research.



    Source link

  • 4 Considerations for Using Salary Data to Inform Compensation Decisions – CUPA-HR

    4 Considerations for Using Salary Data to Inform Compensation Decisions – CUPA-HR

    by Missy Kline | November 15, 2022

    Editor’s note: This blog post, originally published in April 2019, has been updated with additional resources and related content.

    Salary benchmarking is not one-size-fits-all — especially when you’re looking at groups as varied as administrators, professionals, staff and faculty on a college or university campus that is unique in its combination of Carnegie class, affiliation, regional location and mission. The question, then, is how to tailor your benchmarking efforts to take these variables into account and choose data that is appropriate to your unique needs.

    Here are four considerations to help you make the best use of salary data for compensation budget planning for your faculty and staff:

    1) Which institutions should your institution’s salaries be benchmarked against? Making the right comparisons — using position-specific data and carefully selected peers — can make all the difference when planning salaries that will make your institution competitive in the labor market. When you use CUPA-HR’s DataOnDemand, you can narrow down peer institutions by one or several institution-level criteria such as affiliation (public, private indephttp://cupahr.org/surveys/dataondemand/endent or private religious), Carnegie classification, enrollment size, geographic region, total expenses or other characteristics. Remember, balance is key: a larger comparison group gets you more robust data for comparison, but you must also make sure you are comparing to the right types of institutions that make sense for your goals.

    2) Not all faculty are the same. Tenure track faculty, non-tenure track teaching faculty, non-tenure track research faculty and adjunct faculty may each require unique compensation strategies, as do faculty members from different disciplines and ranks. Will the same salary increase help retain both tenured and non-tenured faculty? Does collective bargaining impact salary targets for some, but not all, of these faculty sub-groups? Are there unique, fast-growing, or in-demand departments/disciplines that require a separate strategy?

    3) Keep in mind that administrator salaries are broadly competitive. Like faculty, many administrative positions in higher ed are competitive at a national level. Often, institutions seek administrators with experience at other institutions of a similar size or mission, and with this experience and mobility comes an expectation of a competitive salary. As higher ed moves toward a “business model” where innovative leadership strategies are displacing more traditional shared governance models, finding administrators with the appropriate skills and expertise is becoming increasingly competitive, not only within higher education but sometimes against the broader executive employment market.

    4) Employment competition varies for staff and professionals. Many non-exempt staff are hired from within local labor markets, and therefore other institutions or companies in your state or local Metropolitan Statistical Area might be a better salary comparison than a nationwide set of peer institutions. Exempt or professional staff, however, may be more limited to competition from the higher ed sector, perhaps on a state or regional level. In addition, changes brought about by the pandemic (e.g., remote work opportunities, a desire to relocate) have made many professional positions more globally competitive. Are your institution’s salaries for these employees appropriately scoped for the market in which you need to compete?

     

    Additional Articles and Resources

    How One College Is Using Salary Data to Ensure Pay Equity and Market-Par Compensation

    Compensation Programs/Plans, Executive Compensation in Higher Ed, Equal Pay Act (CUPA-HR Toolkits)

    Working in a Fish Bowl: How One Community College System Navigated a Compensation Study in a Transparent Environment (Higher Ed HR Magazine)



    Source link

  • Event Planning, Institutional Research, Museum, and Tutor Positions See Significant Growth in the Wake of the Pandemic – CUPA-HR

    Event Planning, Institutional Research, Museum, and Tutor Positions See Significant Growth in the Wake of the Pandemic – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | August 10, 2022

    According to data recently released by CUPA-HR, the higher ed workforce positions that saw the greatest growth from 2020-21 to 2021-22 were event planning assistant (up 193%), institutional research analyst (up 161%), head of campus museum (up 120%) and tutor (up 114%). These increases reflect an increase in the number of people hired to fill existing or newly created positions since 2020-21.

    The positions that saw the greatest decline in number of employees were environment, health and safety technician (down 37%), head of campus learning resources center (down 36%), online instruction operations manager (down 32%) and dishwasher (down 29%). These decreases reflect a decrease in the number of people in these positions since 2020-21, either because the institution has reduced the number of available positions or because those positions have unfilled vacancies.

    A new interactive graphic from CUPA-HR shows the Positions and Disciplines With the Highest Growth and Decline for higher ed professionals, staff and tenure-track faculty.

    The Ongoing Impact of COVID-19

    In many cases, the growth and decline in these positions over the past year reflect the impact of the COVID-19 recession that began in the spring of 2020. Like so many employers, institutions have experienced the effects of the Great Resignation and the subsequent challenges of talent recruitment amid the growing availability of remote and flexible work options.

    Other factors may also be at work. The return to in-person events, the growing demand for data to inform institutional decision-making, and the continued interest in honoring the cultural histories of institutions may have increased demand for the positions that saw the greatest increases. Also, as the high school graduates most impacted by the pandemic’s disruption of classroom learning make their way to college, more tutors may be needed to help them bridge anticipated gaps.

    Smaller Shifts in Faculty

    Overall, tenure-track faculty saw much smaller increases and declines in the years analyzed. Disciplines with the highest growth were Library Science (up 8.4%), Liberal Arts and Sciences (up 7.0%), and Area, Ethnic, Cultural, Gender and Group Studies (up 2.3%). Disciplines with the greatest declines were Communications Technologies (down 22%), Agriculture (down 9%) and Engineering Technologies and Technicians (down 6.4%).

    More About the Results

    The data for these results came from CUPA-HR’s annual Professionals in Higher Education Survey, Staff in Higher Education Survey and Faculty in Higher Education Survey. Analyses included more than 600 institutions that participated in each survey in both years of the comparison. For additional details, see the interactive graphic in the Research Center. These data and more are available through CUPA-HR’s DataOnDemand subscription service.



    Source link

  • 2022 Data: Changes in Higher Ed Pay and Workforce Size – CUPA-HR

    2022 Data: Changes in Higher Ed Pay and Workforce Size – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | April 27, 2022

    CUPA-HR has released its data on overall higher ed pay increases, as well as changes in workforce size for 2021-22.

    Higher Ed Pay Increases Have Not Kept Pace With Inflation

    The soaring inflation rate has far outpaced pay increases for the higher education workforce. According to findings from CUPA-HR’s annual workforce surveys for 2021-22, overall median salaries for administrators increased by 3.4%. Professionals and non-exempt staff saw increases of 2.9%, and salaries for tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty increased by 1.6% and 1.5%, respectively. The inflation rate for 2021 was 6.8% and continues to climb.

    This is not the first year that pay increases have not kept up with inflation. Pay increases for administrators, professionals and staff last met or exceeded inflation in 2019-20.  Non-tenure-track faculty salary increases last met or exceeded inflation in 2016-17, and tenure-track faculty salary increases have not kept pace with inflation in any of the past six years.

    Explore pay-increase trends on CUPA-HR’s website.

    Overall Workforce Size Has Declined in the Wake of the Pandemic

    Historically, the overall size of the higher education workforce has increased from year to year. However, colleges and universities are experiencing the same employee recruitment and retention challenges that most U.S. employers have struggled with in the past few years. In both 2020-21 and 2021-22, the size of full-time staff, part-time staff, and tenure-track faculty declined from the prior year.

    Two areas of the workforce that saw growth this year were those of non-tenure-track faculty and adjuncts. Although the number of non-tenure-track faculty and adjuncts declined between 2019-20 and 2020-21, those numbers have rebounded in 2021-22.

    Explore the trends in workforce size changes on CUPA-HR’s website.

    In-Depth Data and Custom Reports

    Higher ed institutions can use CUPA-HR’s DataOnDemand (DOD) subscription service to run comprehensive data tables and analyses.



    Source link

  • New Report on the Representation of Women and Racial/Ethnic Minorities in the Workforce of Minority-Serving Institutions – CUPA-HR

    New Report on the Representation of Women and Racial/Ethnic Minorities in the Workforce of Minority-Serving Institutions – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | February 23, 2022

    Minority-serving institutions (MSIs) play an important role in ensuring students from underrepresented races and ethnicities receive a quality education.

    While there is an abundance of research on students who attend MSIs, little research has examined the MSI workforce, specifically, how the racial/ethnic representation of faculty, administrator, professional and staff reflects the student populations being served.

    The latest CUPA-HR report, The Representation of Women and Racial/Ethnic Minorities in the Workforce of Minority-Serving Higher Education Institutions targets this gap by providing an overview of MSI representation among all U.S. higher ed institutions and showing their geographic spread across the country; providing a closer examination of racial/ethnic and gender composition of faculty, administrators, professionals and non-exempt staff; and assessing how well the racial/ethnic composition of the higher ed workforce at MSIs reflects their student populations and matches the minority-serving mission of the institutions.

    Key findings from the report:

    • MSIs have higher racial/ethnic minority representation among their workforce than non-MSIs.
    • HBCUs have the highest representation of racial/ethnic minority employees.
    • Overall, the representation of racial/ethnic minority faculty at MSIs does not match the representation in students.
    • Overall, administrators, professionals, and staff at MSIs have similar racial/ethnic minority representation when compared to students.

    For more findings on the representation of women and racial/ethnic minorities in the workforce at MSIs, read the full report.



    Source link

  • New Research Shows Women in the Leadership Pipeline in Higher Education Have Better Representation and Pay in Institutions With Female Presidents and Provosts – CUPA-HR

    New Research Shows Women in the Leadership Pipeline in Higher Education Have Better Representation and Pay in Institutions With Female Presidents and Provosts – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | January 24, 2022

    New research by CUPA-HR has found that U.S. colleges and universities with women presidents or provosts have higher representation of women in administrative, dean and faculty positions than institutions led by men. The study also found that colleges and universities with women presidents have higher pay for women in administrative positions than institutions led by men. These positions tend to be pipelines for the senior-most executive positions in higher ed, which underscores the significance of the findings.

    Women Administrators Pay and Representation in Institutions With Female Presidents

    Findings show that institutions with female presidents have a higher percentage of women in all administrative categories — senior institutional officers, institutional administrators and heads of divisions. Although female administrators are generally paid less than male administrators in the same positions regardless of the sex of the president, female senior institutional officers, institutional administrators, and heads of divisions are paid more equitably at institutions with a female president than at institutions with a male president.

    Female Deans and Faculty Pay and Representation in Institutions With Female Provosts

    Institutions with female provosts have a significantly higher representation of women in dean positions and in all faculty ranks. Provost sex does not have a strong or consistent impact on pay equity for deans and faculty; however, it is worth noting that better representation at higher faculty ranks and in dean positions has an impact on pay, as these positions make higher salaries.

    The representation of women drops with successive faculty ranks (from assistant to associate to full professor). These promotions represent the few times in a faculty member’s career when appreciable salary increases are granted. If women are not being promoted, they are not receiving these pay raises. In addition, those in dean positions are generally promoted from senior faculty ranks. Therefore, if women are not adequately represented in senior faculty, they will not have the same likelihood as men of being considered for a higher-paying dean position.

    To sum up the findings, higher ed institutions with female executives have better representation of women throughout their institutions in positions that: a) are paid higher salaries and b) serve as key points in the executive leadership pipeline. Jackie Bichsel, CUPA-HR’s director of research and co-author of the new report, noted that, “In an era where institutions are adapting to shifting workforce expectations, adjusting to continuous decreases in budgets, contemplating changes in enrollment, addressing challenges of recruitment and retention, and rethinking their mission, more openness to change and less tolerance of risk may be just what is needed to navigate this new landscape. Providing more (and more equitable) opportunities for women to advance within higher education seems an obvious path forward in this navigation.”

    Read the full report, Women in the Leadership Pipeline in Higher Education Have Better Representation and Pay in Institutions With Female Presidents and Provosts.



    Source link