APPROVED
International Recruitment Policy Committee
NRU HSE
Proceedings of «02» November 2015
Regulations
Governing International Faculty Review and Promotion at
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
General Provisions. Definitions and abbreviations. ..................................................................... 2
HSE Internal Guidelines on Review and Promotion for international faculty ............................. 4
Concluding Remarks ...................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 1. GUIDANCE NOTE for ANNUAL MONITORING ………………………….. 16
1
1. General Provisions. Definitions and abbreviations.
1.1. Current regulations govern recruitment procedures of faculty from the international
job market for junior and senior full-time tenure-track and tenured in-residence academic staff,
which are carried out in accordance with internationally recognized competitive procedures at the
National Research University Higher School of Economics (“NRU HSE” or “HSE”) by Center of
Advanced Studies (CAS) with involvement of individual faculties and departments.
1.
International recruitment of students and administrators are carried out by
different departments within HSE and covered by separate HSE regulating documents.
1.2. Terminology used throughout these Regulations:
Applicant – international faculty member undergoing the international recruiting procedures
at HSE;
Coordinator – an administrative officer appointed by the Unit in order to provide
administrative support to international faculty employed at this Unit;
Fly-out – a final stage of interviewing procedure conducted on campus, consisting of a
research presentation by applicant, interviews with selection committee and administrative staff,
campus tour, discussions with administrative support units;
Full-time contract – a type of a labor contract guaranteeing a full standard workweek to a
faculty member or a researcher, usually 36 astronomical hours with a 6-day workweek or 40
astronomical hours with a 5-day workweek;
Joint appointment – a special type of labor relationship between NRU HSE and the
international faculty member, where there is more than one contract governing the terms of his or
her employment at HSE, where one contract is considered the primary contract, and the rest –
subordinate or secondary; subordinate/secondary contracts are always part-time at a different Unit
from that of the primary contract;
International faculty member (IH) – a holder of a PhD degree or equivalent, obtained at
one of the leading international university or research center, recruited to HSE through the
international recruitment procedure governed by this document;
International recruiting procedure – a process of competitive selection of IHs to HSE using
the internationally accepted set of rules, governing selection PhD-holding faculty at leading
international universities;
International faculty recruiting – all activities related to advertising, screening, selection,
and accompanying legal and financial supporting procedures carried out for the purpose of
attracting IHs to HSE;
“Writing sample” – a written result of applicant’s intellectual labor, presented for evaluation
during the international recruiting procedure. (Referred to as a “job market paper” in economics.);
Long list – a subset of applicants considered by the search committee to be a potential fit to
the advertised HSE job based on general qualifications, such as PhD-granting institution, number of
publications, research interests, etc., as defined by the job requirements;
Part-time contract – a type of a labor contract guaranteeing less than a standard workweek to
a faculty member or a researcher, or a reduced number of full standard workweeks in a calendar
year;
Post-doctoral researcher – a person who has completed advance degree studies (typically a
PhD), employed on a limited-term contract for the purpose of conducting research at HSE;
Search committee – a committee composed exclusively of tenured professors at international
research universities performing the initial evaluation of document packets submitted by applicants
for consideration to various positions and creating a long-list of candidates;
Selection committee – a committee chaired by the head of the Unit performing final
evaluation of short-listed candidates for the fit of the applicants’ profiles to the HSE academic jobs;
2
Short list – a small, final subset of applicants who have gone through initial remote
interviewing (by phone or other remote means) and screening by the selection committee, and who
are deemed qualified to be invited for the on-campus interview (fly-out);
Unit – an accepting department within NRU HSE (faculty, department, laboratory, research
center, etc.) where the international faculty member will be employed according to the labor
contract between HSE and the employee.
1.3. Abbreviations used throughout these Regulations:
CAS – NRU HSE Center for Advanced Studies (the main international faculty recruiting
department);
HR Department – Human Resources Department;
IH – “international hire,” the faculty members hired by procedures outlined in this document;
IFSU – NRU HSE International Faculty Support Unit, part of the Office of
Internationalization;
IRC – International Recruiting Policy Committee, created by the order of the HSE rector on
20.07.2015, № 6.18.1-01/2007-05;
SACS – Senior Academic Selection Committee
SSC – Senior Search Committee
1.4. International recruiting process at NRU HSE consists of several basic processes, carried
out throughout the academic year:
 Planning and organization of all activities related to international faculty recruiting at
NRU HSE;
 All procedures of international recruiting;
 Administrative and financial support procedures necessary for legalizing the labor
relations between NRU HSE and selected IHs, including all procedures governed by the
procedures of competitive selection of applicants to faculty positions to NRU HSE;
 All activities related to integration of IHs into the NRU HSE professional academic
environment and their accommodation to the new place of employment.
All legal procedures involved in the labor relationships between NRU HSE and the IHs are
governed by laws of Russian Federation and local normative documents established at NRU HSE.
1.5. All policies, procedures, regulations, including strategic plan and vision for
international recruiting, as well as general coordination of the recruiting departments, are
established and carried out by the IRC and the supervising vice-rector. The only exception is
international recruiting realized as part of the competitive grant program financed by special
grants from the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.
1.6. Competitive selection of IHs, recruited as part of the Ministry of Education
competitive research grant program, is carried outside the international recruitment procedure, and
is governed by a separate set of regulations and procedures.
1.7. International recruitment procedures carried out at Units, established in cooperation
with international partners, are guided by internal regulations of such Units, if such exist. In case
of a conflict between departmental internal regulations and the current document, departmental
regulations take precedence.
3
2. HSE Internal Guidelines on Review and Promotion for international
faculty
The present section describes purposes, timing, procedures and outcomes of review and promotion
procedures applicable to Internationally Recruited tenure-track academics. The overall
responsibility for the review process rests with the HSE Promotion and Review Committee (HSE
PRC) and Unit’s bodies set for the purposes of review of the Unit’s international faculty activities,
decision making on promotion, extension and termination of their employment contracts by the
Unified HSE PRC. The Unit’s bodies for these purposes include a Unit Committee on Review and
Promotion (Unit RPC) for the purposes of interim and tenure review, and Unit Senior Appointment
and Promotion Committee (Unit SAPC) for the purposes of promotion to Full professorship. These
committees make all decisions on behalf of the Unit within the scope of their responsibilities.
2.1. Unit Review Committees
1.
Unit Review and Promotion Committee
The members of the Unit RPC for the purposes of interim and tenure review are holders of the
following positions:
 Dean
 Unit head
 All Unit’s tenured (International) full-time academics
 At least two external senior academics suggested by the Unit
 Unit’s Senior academics co-opted by RPC
Promotion decision is made by consensus of all eligible members of the Committee, or where
consensus cannot be reached, by supermajority (75%) voting.
The decision is subject to approval by the Vice-Rector in charge of international recruitment and
promotion and the unified HSE RPC; the discretion of these bodies are confined to ensuring that
the procedure was objective, fair, and in full accordance with the current guidelines and the
University statutes.
2.
Unit Senior Appointment and Promotion Committee
2.1.2.1 The Unit Senior Appointment and Promotion Committee for the purposes of
promotion to Full (International) professorship consists of holders of the following
positions:
 All Unit’s Full (International) Professors. In case the Unit does not have Full
International Professors, holders of such title from other disciplines are invited to
participate in the process if not for the expertise in a given field, then for
adherence to regulations and procedures.
 At least two externally appointed academics in the rank of Full (International)
Professors. In case no Unit’s full professors are available to service on the
committee (see above), two more external full professors in the chosen discipline
may be requested to participate in the process.
 Unit’s academics in the rank of full (but not International) professor co-opted by
RPC
2.1.2.2 The decisions of the Unit SAPC are made by consensus of all eligible
members of the Committee, or where consensus cannot be reached, by
supermajority (75%) voting.
4
2.1.2.3 The decision is subject to approval by the First Vice-Rector in charge of
international recruitment and promotion and the HSE RPC; the discretion of these
bodies are confined to ensuring that the procedure was objective, fair, and in full
accordance with the current guidelines and the University statutes.
2.2.
INTERIM REVIEW (First 3-year term)
1.
Interim Review: general. An overall review of a IH’s activities (including
research and teaching) for the whole period of employment (Interim Review) is made in the
third year of employment. As a result of the Interim Review, the employment contract may be
extended:
 for a second 3-year term tenure-track term,
 for a 1-year or a 3-year teaching-track term,
 for 1-year, non-renewable term.
2.



Interim Review: criteria for employment extension
Evidence of reasonable chances to obtain tenure in three years, usually
demonstrated as research that is published or is expected to achieve publication
in reputable professional journals, considered, if necessary, together with the
references, reports and recommendations. In accordance with the HSE
requirements, research of the successful candidate has to be published at least as
a working paper(s).
Evidence of good teaching.
Evidence of constructive contributions to the Unit’s and HSE activities.
2.3.2.1 The Unit RPC will consider all cases individually, in strictly confidential and
non-discriminatory manner. The committee has an ultimate authority to make
judgements at its discretion, depending on the particular circumstances of the
candidate.
2.3.2.2 If after the Interim Review, the research and teaching are considered
satisfactory for continuation of tenure-track employment, the IH is offered a second
3-year employment contract. The conditions of subsequent contract cannot be
downgraded. Salary adjustment may be also considered as described further in this
document.
2.3.2.3 If after the Interim Review the IH’s research are considered insufficient for
tenure-track employment, but the IH demonstrates sustained excellence in teaching
as evident by teaching evaluations, informal student reports, and peer evaluations, he
(she) may be offered an employment contract for a 1-year or a 3-year term as a
teaching track IH. Decisions on the length of the term are made by the RPC at the
time of the review. Contractual obligations on teaching will be increased up to 12
academic hours per week and the salary range must be established in accordance
with the HSE guidelines for teaching-track international faculty.
2.3.2.4 If after the Interim Review the IH’s both research and teaching are
considered insufficient for further employment, he or she may be offered a term of 1
more year, after which the contract is terminated. The conditions of such subsequent
contract cannot be downgraded.
3.
Interim Review: timing and procedures
5
2.3.3.1 The information letter on the review procedure and requirements is to be sent
to the candidate not later than October 1 of the third year of his (her) employment.
2.3.3.2 The candidate is requested to present a CV, a report, a set of published or
unpublished papers, and a list of not more than three names of recommended
external reviewer(s) before a deadline (set as March 1), as specified in the letter.
2.3.3.3. For each candidate, Head of the Unit (Dean) presents a report on the overall
performance as a tenure-track faculty member, describing his/her role in
strengthening reputation of the university, development of research activities and
curriculum, teaching performance (based on internal 3-year teaching monitoring and
Unit’s /HSE student survey and peer review results), and other contributions to the
Unit and the university.
2.3.3.4 The Interim Review is to be completed no later than two months before the
end of his (her) initial 3-year employment term (usually by June 30).
4.
Interim Review: Research evaluation
2.3.4.1 For each review the Unit RPC (subject to approval by the Unified HSE RPC)
appoints:
 two (if necessary, three) external reviewers in relevant academic field(s), one of
whom is invited from the list proposed by the IH, and the second (third) is an
anonymous reviewer (s),
 an internal reader in relevant academic field (where possible) who is a tenured
HSE professor under an international contract.
2.3.4.2 Research papers prepared by the FTA candidate are also distributed to all
Unit’s tenured professors, who have the right to express their views and
recommendations in written to the Unit RPC and Unified HSE RPC.
2.3.4.3 External reviewers and the internal reader are requested to prepare
independent reports on the candidate’s research activities, taking into account his
(her) published and unpublished papers. These reports, as well as the
recommendations of the tenured professors, are confidential and are disclosed only
to UNit RPC members and Unified HSE RPC members, but not to IH under review.
However, the Unit RPC may disclose any substantive comments made by a review
on the research papers, provided this can be done in a way which maintains the
confidentiality of the reviewer.
2.3.4.4 The final evaluation of the research activities by the Unit RPC (or Unified
HSE RPC) is based on reports, feedback and recommendations of the external
reviewers, the internal reader and the tenured professors. If the IH’s research and
teaching are considered insufficient for further employment by both the internal
reader and the tenured professors, the external reviewers may not to be asked to
provide their recommendations.
2.3.4.5 External reviewers could be offered a reasonable fee if necessary.
5.
Interim Review: Teaching evaluation
6
The evaluation of teaching activities relies on a report, prepared by the Head of the
Unit (Dean) and based on the candidate’s teaching internal monitoring, including
teaching evaluations.
2.3.5.1 An important consideration is fulfilment of contractual teaching terms. The
IH may teach less than the contractual number of hours only due to no fault of his
(her) own, such as class cancellation for low enrolment and other unforeseen
circumstances.
2.3.5.2 It is the responsibility of the IH to attempt to fulfil contractual teaching hours
in case of a low teaching load by participating in other activities of the Unit or the
major subdivision, which must be made available by the head or dean in lieu of
teaching hours.
6.
Interim Review: overall results, decision on employment extension,
coordination with administrative units
2.3.6.1 The Unit RPC studies the reports on research and report on teaching, clears
all the contentious issues, requests additional information if necessary, and makes a
final decision on extension or termination of the employment contract.
2.3.6.2 Decisions on review are made by the Review and Promotion Committee on
the basis of previously agreed financial and administrative constraints (such as a
salary interval, standard workload) and cannot be overruled by the university.
2.3.6.3 Decisions are implemented after the confirmation by the appropriate
university administrator that the salary and workload is within the agreed interval (or
after soliciting the agreement of the appropriate administrator for a proposal to set
the salary and/or workload of a particular candidate above/below the agreed interval
as an exception) and confirmation that the procedures have been followed in
accordance with the Guidelines. The power of the University authorities shall neither
exceed nor overrule an academic decision. If a candidate or the HSE authorities
challenge the decision on the grounds of procedural irregularity then the University
shall establish a Dispute Resolution Committee, which includes Unit Director, Head
of the Search/Review Committee, First Vice-Rector, and one external expert, which
either confirms the decision or requests some additional actions.
2.3.6.4 CAS Director or other administrative HSE representative, such as deputy first
vice-rector or the supervising first vice-rector in charge of international recruiting,
informs the candidates about the review outcome. The information letters are sent to
them within one week after the review, together with the edited summary of the
references (external and internal). The summaries contain the constructive comments
on the research papers and publishing policy of the candidate presented
anonymously.
2.3.6.5 The letter about the extension or termination of the employment contract is
signed by the HSE First Vice-Rector and sent to the candidate no later than two
weeks after receiving the appropriate correspondence from the Unit. Extension of
employment is officially executed in accordance with the current legislation of the
Russian Federation and the internal regulations of the HSE.
7.
Interim Review: other issues
7
2.3.7.1 If before joining the HSE the IH held an academic position for a proper
period with a reputable university, or if he(she) has an exceptional publications
record, the Unit RPC can decide to make earlier Interim Review or to skip it and
progress to the Tenure Review, as described further in this document.
2.3.7.2 Where employment has been interrupted for personal reasons (e.g. maternity
leave), the IH may be granted a postponement of the Interim Review.
2.3. TENURE (MAJOR) REVIEW (second 3-year employment term)
1.
Tenure Review: General
2.4.1.1 On the 6-th year of employment the overall review of activities for the entire
6-year period is undertaken (Tenure Review). Tenure is a type of employment
contract when academic’s publication activity is no longer the sole criteria for
contract extension. It is expected that tenured IH devotes significant amount of
his/her time to research, acts like mentor for non-tenured staff, takes additional
administrative duties, etc.
2.4.1.2 The overall responsibility for the Tenure Review of activities, decision
making on extension and termination of employment contracts lays on the Unit RPC.
The Unit RPC will consider all cases individually, in strictly confidential and nondiscriminatory manner. The committee has an ultimate authority to make judgements
at its discretion, depending on the particular circumstances of the candidate.
2.4.1.3 The decision to offer a tenured position may be made by the Unit RPC earlier
than 6-year term expiration when before joining the Unit department the IH held an
academic position for a proper period with a reputable university or he(she) has an
exceptional publications record.
2.4.1.4 As a result of Tenure Review the employment contract may be extended:
 for tenured position (with new contract type);
 in specific circumstances, for a third, non-renewable, not more than 3-year
term leading to another Tenure Review;
 for a 1-year or 3-year teaching-track position;
 for a 1-year non-renewable term.
2.
Tenure Review: criteria for employment extension
2.4.2.1 The review will be done on the ground of teaching, research, and academic
service evaluations. Demonstration of the ability to publish in reputable international
outlets is critical to receiving a positive evaluation.
2.4.2.2 Successful completion of the Tenure Review leading to Tenured Position will
be based on:
 Evidence of a sustained research program and peer-reviewed publications of
good quality, considered together with the references, reports, and
recommendations.
 Evidence of a coherent and feasible three to five year plan of future research and
publications.
 Evidence of quality teaching at undergraduate and/or postgraduate levels.
8



3.
Evidence of constructive contributions to the Unit’s administration and
university service.
A developing reputation in the field of the IH’s professional expertise
Where appropriate, securing external funds to support research and contributions
to the Unit’s/HSE research centres and laboratories.
Criteria for third not-more-than-3-year tenure-track employment extension
2.4.3.1 The decision to extend employment for a third not more than 3-year term
could be taken in particular circumstances only if:
 The candidate shows substantial (e.g. a robust portfolio of working papers and
work in progress) and tangible (e.g., a good publication record and/or papers at
the “revise and resubmit” stage in reputable journals) potential for being awarded
tenure at the end of the extension period.
 The candidate has received positive (good or excellent) references from the
independent reviewers, with the expressed expectation that the required
publication record for tenure will be achieved by the end of the extension period.
2.4.3.2 The not more than 3-year extension period is meant to provide the candidate
with the time necessary to publish its current portfolio of working papers and work
in progress whenever particular circumstances might have delayed this process.
2.4.3.3 No later than on the 9th year of employment another Tenure Review is to be
undertaken. Based on its results the contract may be extended either for a tenure
position, for a 1-year or a 3-year teaching-track term, or for a 1-year, non-renewable
term.
4.
Provision of a teaching-track contract type
If after the Tenure review the research is considered insufficient, but the IH demonstrates
sustained excellence in teaching as is evident by the teaching evaluations and other reports, he
or she may be offered a teaching-track position in accordance with the HSE teaching-track
guidelines. Teaching load may be increased to 12 academic contact hours per week, and the
salary adjusted according to the teaching-track guidelines in the respective discipline.
5.
One year extension or change of contract type
If after the Tenure review the teaching and/or research are considered insufficient for tenuretrack employment he (she) is offered an employment contract with the Unit for a term of one
more year, after which the contract is terminated. The employment conditions for this
additional year cannot be downgraded. This additional year of employment is meant to
facilitate the transition to another institution. Alternatively, the non-tenured candidate could
be proposed/apply for a teaching or administrative position at the Unit/HSE on the same
grounds as any domestic (i.e. non-international) candidate, including duties, workload,
conditions and salary.
2.4. Tenure (Major) Review: timing and procedures
1.
The Information letter on the Tenure (Major) Review procedure and
requirements is to be sent to the candidate no later than October 1st of the 6-th year of his
(her) employment. The portfolio must be sent for a review no later than 6 months before the
end of the contract.
2.
The candidate is requested to present the Tenure portfolio, consisting of:

a CV and a statement of planned research;
9




a report including a statement on his (her) teaching contribution and related
activities;
a set of at least 4 published or unpublished papers;
a list of recommended external reviewers - before a deadline (which will be no
later than 6 months before the contract expiration date), as specified in the letter.
The proposed external reviewers should be reputable senior academics in the
relevant field of expertise and should have no conflict of interests with respect to
the issue (e.g., should be neither co-authors, nor previous advisors/members of
the candidate’s PhD committee);
a list of up to two academics that shall not be appointed as anonymous external
reviewers.
3.
For each candidate, the Head of the Unit (Dean) presents a report on the overall
performance as tenure-track faculty member, describing his/her role in strengthening
reputation of the university, development of research activities and curriculum, teaching
performance (based on internal 6-year teaching monitoring and Unit’s/HSE student survey
and peer review results), and other contributions to the department and the university.
4.
The Tenure Review of activities is to be completed no later than two months
before the end of his (her) second 3-year employment term.
5.
Tenure Review: Research evaluation
2.5.5.1 For each Tenure Review the Units RPC (or Unified HSE RPC) appoints:
 at least 4 external reviewers in relevant academic field, half of whom are invited
from the list proposed by the candidate and half of experts are anonymous
reviewers. External reviewers could be offered a reasonable fee if necessary.
 an internal reader in relevant academic field (if possible) who is a tenured HSE
professor holding a PhD degree; if such person is absent, an external reader
should be appointed.
2.5.5.2 Research papers, report and CV are also distributed to all tenured professors
of the Unit, who have the right to express their views and recommendations in
written to the Unit’s RPC (Unified HSE RPC).
2.5.5.3 Each external reviewer is asked to prepare an independent report on at least 4
published and unpublished papers’ quality for the Review and on the candidate’s
further publishing potential. Internal reader is asked to prepare an independent report
on at least 2 published and unpublished papers’ quality.
2.5.5.4 The External reviewers’ and Internal reader’s reports, as well as the views
and recommendations of the tenured professors, are confidential and are disclosed
only to the Unit’s SAC members (and members of the Unified HSE RPC). However,
the Unit RPC may disclose any substantive comments made by a review on the
research papers, provided this can be done in a way which maintains the
confidentiality of the reviewer.
2.5.5.5 The evaluation of the research activities is based on the tenure portfolio and
reports prepared by the external reviewers, the internal reader and the views and
recommendations of the tenured professors.
6.
Tenure Review: Teaching evaluation and other contributions
10
The evaluation of teaching activities and other contributions relies on the report by the
Head of the Unit (Dean) and heads of all HSE employing departments in case of joint
employments.
7.
Tenure Review: overall results and decision on employment extension
2.5.7.1 The Unit RPC studies the Tenure portfolio, external reviewers’ and internal
reader’s reports on research, the report of the Head of the Unit (heads of all HSE
employing Units in case of joint employments) on teaching and other contributions,
the views and recommendations of the tenured professors, clears all the contentious
issues, requests additional information if necessary and makes the tenure decision.
2.5.7.2 Head of the Unit (Dean) informs the candidates about the review outcome.
The information letters are sent to them within one week after the review, together
with the edited summary of the references (external and internal). The summaries
contain the constructive comments on the research papers and publishing policy of
the candidate presented anonymously. The letter about the extension or termination
of the employment contract is signed by the HSE First Vice-Rector and sent to the
candidate. Extension of employment is officially executed in accordance with the
current legislation of the Russian Federation and the internal regulations of the HSE.
8.
Tenure Review: Right to appeal
The academic decision of the Unit RPC (as approved by Unified HSE RPC) on tenure
reviews is final, but a candidate has the right to appeal should he or she feel that the
Committee has failed to conduct the review in accordance with the procedures as
stated above. Any such appeal will be heard by an independent adjudicator appointed
by the Unified HSE RPC, being a senior person with academic experience, whose
remit will be to investigate whether the review has been conducted in accordance with
the procedures described in this document.
9.
Tenure Review: outside offers
2.5.9.1 If an offer made to a person not employed by the Unit includes tenure, then
the candidate should have undergone the Tenure Review procedure described these
guidelines before the offer is made. Such a procedure might be initiated by the Head
of the Unit (Dean) or Unit RPC upon the expression of interest by the candidate. If
the candidate is considered for a Full (International) Professorship, the relevant
committee for the procedure is SAPC.
2.5.9.2 The same procedure applies to academics who are presently employed by the
Unit outside of the international recruitment process.
10.
Tenure Review: early review requests
2.5.10.1 A candidate who has requested an early tenure review, but was not granted a
review, may be faced with a choice of either looking for another employment (with a
non-renewable one-year contract) or, if deemed fit to continue employment at HSE,
may not undergo another tenure review procedure for another two years.
2.5.10.2 Any candidate who is requesting an early review should sign a
Memorandum of Understanding, which informs him or her on these conditions of an
early tenure review request.
11
2.5.10.3 The Unit RPC has a right to deny tenure review upon initial evaluation of
the applicant’s packet if there is clear evidence that a tenure review is premature,
without engaging outside parties. Such decision must be documented by majority
vote of the Unit RPC and forwarded to CAS to be communicated to the candidate.
11.
Tenure review: other issues
In exceptional cases, where employment has been interrupted for justified personal
reasons (e.g., maternity/paternity leave) may be granted a postponement of the Tenure
Review.
2.5.
Promotion to HSE Full professorship: criteria and procedures
1.
Tenured IHs are supposed to steadily develop their academic career following
successful completion of major review. Conditional on this development, and in
acknowledgement of their career accomplishments, tenured faculty may be promoted to Full
professorship.
2.
Full (International) Professor shall be an academic with established
international reputation for substantial personal contributions to scientific knowledge in
his/her field, and acknowledged academic leadership within the Unit, HSE, and nation-wide.
IHs of this rank are key holders of academic culture of the Unit and university. Having
intellectual authority and responsibility, they set and maintain excellence standards in
research and teaching, provide mentoring services to junior faculty members, and organize
research activity of faculty and research students. As a rule, they have restricted teaching load
(including sabbatical), extended travel budget to facilitate research visits and work with coauthors.
3.
Full professors are entitled for higher salary, membership of Unit’s
Recruitment, Review and Promotion and Senior Appointment and Promotion Committees
with full voting rights. They may also be members of other academic committees of the Unit.
4.
Timing and procedures
2.6.1.1 Decision of promotion to Full professorship is made by the Unit Senior
Appointment and Promotion Committee (SAPC).
2.6.1.2 The SAP Committee grounds its decision primarily on the reports of
independent external reviewers it appoints (academic evaluation) who comment on
the papers/books and the overall impact of the academic's work. Head of the Unit
also submits to the SAP Committee a report covering research activities, teaching,
and university services of the candidate.
2.6.1.3 Associate professors shall be entitled to apply for promotion to Full Professor
at any time after getting tenure. The request includes application letter and the list of
publications. Associate professors who were denied promotion are eligible to apply
for promotion to Full professorship once in three years.
2.6.1.4 The Head of the Unit (Dean) or SAPC may initiate the procedure by majority
(50%) voting of the eligible members. In exceptional cases, the Unit RPC might
suggest the promotion procedure at the successful conclusion of Tenure (Major)
Review. In this case, SAPC might use materials from the RPC, including reports by
external reviewers, in its proceedings.
12
2.6.1.5 Candidate for promotion to Full professorship prepares a promotion package
consisting of:
 a CV presented on the standard template, listing all publications and personal
distinctions
 a report on his (her) academic achievements, statement of planned research,
teaching and university services
 a set of up to 5 papers and other academic work published over his or her
academic career which best characterize his/her research agenda and
contributions. Other papers should be made available in electronic or hard copy
form upon Committee's request.
 a list of at least 4 names of recommended external reviewers, plus at most one
name of an academic who shall not be appointed as an external reviewer. The
SAP Committee appoints at least 4 external reviewers who are full professors in
the field of specialization of the candidate, of whom half is taken from the
candidate’s list.
2.6.1.6 Reports of the reviewers are confidential, and disclosed only to the SAP
Committee members. Each reviewer prepares an independent report on the package
of at least 4 papers submitted by the candidate. The SAP Committee may reveal to
the candidate any substantive comments made by the reviewers, provided this can be
done in a way which maintains their confidentiality.
2.6.1.7 Promotion decision is made by consensus of all eligible members of the SAP
Committee, or where consensus cannot be reached, by supermajority (75%) voting.
As a rule, sufficient condition for promotion shall be support of the candidate
expressed in the majority of the reviewers’ reports. In case of inconclusive or
ambiguous judgments, SAP can solicit reports of additional external reviewer(s).
2.6.1.8 The SAP Committee meetings can be normally organized twice a year, and
the whole procedure of Promotion decision to Unit’s HSE Full professorship will
take not less than 6 months from the start of the procedure.
5.
Criteria
2.6.2.1 Academic evaluation shall be based on the following criteria:
 further scientific publications in the period after the Tenure Review. The
Committee’s evaluation of novelty and originality of these publications
shall be based on the conclusions of the reports prepared by the External
reviewers. Additional criteria consist of the candidate’s impact on the
academic community, personal contributions of the academic to the coauthored papers, books, editorial activities etc., as well as the overall
dynamics of his/her career development;
 contributions to academic reputation of the Unit and HSE, such as
editorship or editorial board membership in international journals,
refereeing for reputable journals, organization of international
conferences, invited/distinguished lectures, elections in international
academic bodies etc.;
 contribution to academic capacity building at the Unit such as
participation and leadership in research laboratories, academic programs,
international research projects, mentorship and supervision of junior
colleagues, etc.
13
2.6.2.2 Head of the Unit (Dean)'s report summarizes academic career, teaching and
administrative/university services of the candidate. Teaching of the promoted
academic shall be of acceptable standard. In addition, successful candidate shall be
acclaimed as good/exemplary citizen at the Unit, be efficient in his/her
administrative duties and be renowned for contribution to nationwide and
international reputation of HSE through applied and vocational projects,
consultancy, media visibility etc.
2.6.2.3 Head of the Unit informs the candidate about the review outcome. The
information letters are sent to them within one week after the review, together with
the edited summary of the references (external and internal). The summaries contain
the constructive comments on the research papers and publishing policy of the
candidate presented anonymously.
6.
Promotion to HSE Full professorship: outside offers
If an offer made to a person not employed by the Unit includes HSE Full (International)
Professorship, then the candidate should undergo the Tenure Review procedure
described in 2.1-2.3 of the these guidelines with SAP Committee serving as a relevant
decision-making body. Such a procedure might be initiated by the Head of the Unit
(Dean) or Unit SAPC upon the expression of interest by the candidate.
The same procedure applies to academics who are presently employed by the Unit
outside of the international recruitment process.
2.6. SALARY ADJUSTMENTS
1.
Unit’s Academic Ranking
2.7.1.1 A candidate before passing the Tenure Review usually holds the
internationally recognized title of Assistant Professor.
2.7.1.2 A candidate who has passed the Tenure Review, and was granted tenure, is
automatically promoted to the internationally recognized title of Associate Professor.
2.7.1.3 A tenured IH who has successfully passed the promotion review to the Full
(International) professorship is promoted to this position in accordance with the HSE
requirements and procedures. This position is officially acknowledged by the Unit as
equivalent to Full Professor according to international academic criteria.
2.
Salary of non-tenured international faculty
Subject to further review by the responsible HSE bodies, including the Unified HSE RPC, the
current practice of Salary adjustments (for non-tenured staff) at the Unit is:
2.7.2.1 Each IH is entitled to annual salary adjustment (usually starting September
1st) by official CPI (consumer price index) declared in RF for previous calendar year.
2.7.2.2 A candidate who passed Interim Review and was granted a second 3-year
contract is entitled to additional one-time salary adjustment (at the start of the 4-th
year of employment) to the level not lower than the benchmark salary (as defined
below).
14
2.7.2.1. The Review and Promotion Committee grades the candidates and the Unit
Director decides on the salary according to this grading within the range approved by
the HSE IR Committee for this year. If the proposed salary is outside the agreed
interval then it is the subject of additional negotiations with the HSE responsible
administrators.


3.
The benchmark salary means
either average salary of newly hired IHs (of the same qualification and in the same field)
starting work at the Unit in the same academic year
or mid-point salary advertised in the Job Market in the same year.
2.7.3.1 A candidate who passed Interim Review, was granted a second 3-year
contract and demonstrated outstanding publishing activity is entitled to additional
one-time salary adjustment (at the start of the 4-th year of employment) to the level
of not less than 10% above benchmark salary. This salary adjustment is subject to
the Unit RPC recommendation.
2.7.3.2 A candidate who was initially hired with salary premium to benchmark
salary, passed Interim Review, was granted the second 3-year contract and
demonstrated outstanding publishing activity is entitled to an additional one-time
salary adjustment (at the start of the 4-th year of employment) with similar premium
to the benchmark salary (defined as per p.4.2.3). This salary adjustment is subject to
the Unit RPC recommendation.
2.7.3.3 A candidate who was granted a third not more than 3-year contract after
Tenure Review is entitled to additional one-time salary adjustment (at the start of the
7-th year of employment) to the level not lower than the benchmark salary.
4.
Salary of tenured faculty
2.7.4.1 Each tenured IH is entitled to annual salary adjustment (usually starting
September 1st) by official CPI (consumer price index) declared in RF for the
previous calendar year.
2.7.4.2 Upon granting Tenure the IH is entitled to personal salary adjustment (not
less than as per benchmark salary above) depending on his (her) personal
achievements and Tenure Review overall results to the level not less than 15% above
the benchmark salary.
2.7.4.3 Promotion to Full (International) professorship entitles the IH to personal
salary adjustment not less than 20% above the benchmark salary, depending on his
(her) academic standing and achievements.
2.7. CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
1.
HSE Conflict of Interests
If the candidate for hiring/promotion holds an administrative position at HSE, then he/she
cannot take part in any academic hiring/promotion procedures in his/her administrative
capacity. HSE Rector appoints a replacement for this person.
3. CONCLUDING REMARKS
3.1. The current Methodological Recommendations and any changes must be approved by
the NRU HSE International Recruiting Policy Committee.
15
Appendix 1
GUIDANCE NOTE for ANNUAL MONITORING
1.
Annual Monitoring is an informal process that is conducted within the Unit
with or without the involvement of the review committees. The purpose of the review is to
provide a tenure-track IH an opportunity to evaluate his or her activities throughout the year
and suggest areas for improvement.
2.
Annual Monitoring must be initiated in the form of self-report on the part of
the IH in accordance with the HSE procedures for the “unified contract” conditions. Report
must be prepared in the form provided by CAS and submitted to CAS no later than June 15 of
each year.
3.




The report must contain, at a minimum, the following information:
An updated CV with a list of all publications, conference presentations and
courses taught throughout the year;
A set of teaching evaluations for the courses taught during the year;
A report on activities within the Unit, such as service, not listed on the CV and
administrative duties performed as part of service (not compensated).
A brief description of the administrative and other duties performed in addition
to the listed in the contract, with pay.
4.
The report must be made available to the Head of the Unit within 10 days of
submission to CAS. The supervising administrator must submit a brief response to CAS on
the duties of the IH, containing his or her evaluation of the duties performed, suggested areas
for improvement, if any, and other relevant information.
5.
If the administrator’s report contains suggestions for improvement, an excerpt
(not a full report) is made available to the hire. If necessary, a meeting with the administrator
or the CAS director is arranged for the purpose of reviewing suggested areas for
improvement. In case such meeting takes place, brief notes become a part of the IH’s file.
6.
Annual self-report, administrators’ reports, and other relevant documents (such
as notes from the feedback meeting) become a part of the IH’s permanent file and are used by
the PRC at the time of the major reviews.
16