“if you don't know what port you are sailing to, no wind is favorable”**

University reforms
on the whole, the criterion “subject fit” scores best with 5.85, followed by the criterion
“prestigious journal publications” (5.8), “influental publications” (5.79) and “social skills”
(5.74). At the lowest end are the criteria “applicant does not compete for resources” (2.07),
“applicant has substantial practical experience” (3.07) and “applicant is already connected
with the departmental network” (3.17). From table 1 we can infer the differences between
the VHB commissions’ assessment of the different appointment criteria. Besides the 26
criteria that we offered to assess, there may be further criteria relevant to appointments.
This option was not really utilized and these suggestions diverge from what is required,
ranging from: The applicant … “… should pursue his/her own research initiatives and
not fashionable themes” to “… should have contacts in practice” and “… willingness to
relocate” and “availability outside the teaching semester”.
Table 2 shows the average values of the appointment criteria subdivided into Germany,
Austria, and Switzerland. It appears that on average, university professors from Austria
assess the importance of appointment criteria slightly higher than the Swiss and German
university professors. However, on the whole, the assessments of the criteria’s importance
are similar for all three countries.
Table 3 shows the appointment criteria’s average values as expressed by respondents at
private and publicly financed universities. It appears that in principle, university professors
at public universities evaluate their appointment criteria similarly, but with slightly
varying emphases.
Table 4 shows the average values of the appointment preferences of the top, middle, and
lowest groups in the CHE research reputation ranking of management faculties. The
evaluation of appointment criteria’s importance differs more between these three groups
than between countries, publicly and privately financed universities, and between VHB
commissions. On average, faculties in the lowest group of the CHE ranking have higher
demands for applicants than do the faculties belonging to the central and top groups.
4.1.2 rAnking of Appointment preferenCes
Because the appointment preferences were determined by means of a seven-point scale,
which, in principle, allows all criteria to be equally important and/or unimportant, we
wanted to know the preference sequence of at least the most important criteria. Thus, two
weeks after the first survey, we sent a second questionnaire in which we asked the respondents
to rank the eight most important criteria. 428 professors participated in this second
questionnaire. It appears that the three most important criteria, determined in the first
survey (subject fit, publication in prestigious journals, and social skills), were also regarded
as most important in the direct ranking.
sbr 60 January 2008 -31 15