Issue link: http://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/54806
These include rewarding publication in journals outside the professor's field and rewarding interdisciplinary teaching. At the same time, deans must acknowledge the time devoted to preparation of interdisciplinary courses, which often comes at the high opportunity cost of fewer papers written for publication. where the publication might not count toward tenure. We need a revised system that rec- ognizes the importance of interdisci- plinary research and equally rewards intra- and interdisciplinary research. As founding editor of a new interdis- ciplinary journal in economics educa- tion, I've found that interdisciplinary teaching is a fertile breeding ground for interdisciplinary research. There- fore, we need a system where both are actively encouraged. Preparation of such courses takes time and comes with a high oppor- tunity cost, especially for new faculty. For that reason, faculty must be cred- ited not just for the time they spend teaching the course, but the time they spend in preparation. Where Change Should Begin Changing the tenure system requires active participation from all con- cerned. Business school deans must assume a central role by articulating and promoting to all stakeholders the goal of integrating across the curriculum. This includes actively encouraging senior faculty to teach and research across disciplines. Not only would they provide a role model for younger faculty, but they might be more inclined to grant tenure to young professors doing the same. To engage faculty in cross- disciplinary efforts, deans also must implement the proper incentives. The schools themselves need to establish an interdisciplinary facilita- tor to initiate dialogue among faculty throughout the university, and then implement cross-disciplinary strate- gies. Schools could assign the role to existing faculty or staff in exchange for a reduced workload. The facili- tator would function as a liaison between everyone involved in cross- disciplinary integration by conveying information, standards, and strategies from multiple fields. But a central problem remains: Who will evaluate the candidates for tenure, and how will this be done? If the job falls to existing faculty, who among them is knowledge- able about interdisciplinary research and teaching? And how can schools ensure that innovation rather than conformity is rewarded? I don't have all the answers. But I do know that a revised tenure system must acknowledge that all stakeholders in business education— including students, faculty, adminis- trators, and the business communi- ty—should contribute to the tenure decision. For example, local business leaders should let deans know what they need from graduates so both faculty and students can evaluate faculty based on those requirements. Tenure then could be based on how well professors fulfill the needs of the business community, rather than how successfully they perpetuate axi- omatic research. Yes, some faculty will protest, claiming that such a system attenu- ates their self-government. But I submit that the current paradigm is not particularly equitable, either, given that it allows a small number of tenured professors to decide the contours of the discipline. Again, I'm not advocating that universities abolish tenure, because that won't solve the fundamental issue of recognizing and reward- ing talent. But I'm suggesting that schools need to revise the tenure system so that it doesn't stand in the way of rewarding the innovative efforts of those who strive to inte- grate the curriculum. What Lies Ahead As business school educators, we have the essential task of helping our students develop multifunctional, multidisciplinary perspectives. But trying to change how we teach with- out realigning the tenure incentives is tantamount to trying to change a ship's course while it is still anchored. I believe we can remove the barriers between disciplines with- out weakening them. This might require schools to create individual- ized solutions to the tenure system. It definitely will require tenure sys- tems to reward innovative, interdis- ciplinary research and teaching. But once we open a dialogue and work toward consensus on how to imple- ment multidisciplinary education, we can bridge the chasm between what business schools teach and what faculty think. ■ z Jack Reardon is a professor at the School of Business at Hamline University in St. Paul, Minnesota, and editor of the International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education. BizEd MARCH/APRIL 2011 67