Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/59185
Scorecard A The Faculty t the end of her first semester as the business school's new mar- keting instructor, Professor Trudeau received glowing evalua- tions from students. They praised her practical knowledge and experience and noted how much they enjoyed the marketing professionals she brought to class as guest speakers. Because she had previously been a product manager in a large international group, her examples were drawn from real-world situations. She also had a vast net- work of corporate contacts. Students seemed to appreciate this glimpse into the reality of corporate life. Some of Professor Trudeau's colleagues were less enthusiastic about her. Because she had never published research in a recognized journal, they felt that there was little academic justification for retaining her. Nonetheless, because the school placed a high level of importance on the quality of course delivery, her contract was renewed. One way administrators traditionally have judged how much value profes- Every business school needs talented professors whose skills suit the school's mission. A Faculty Scorecard helps sors add to the school is by looking at their research output. After all, high- quality research improves the classroom, adds depth to executive education programs, strengthens ties to the corporate community, improves national and international partnerships, and enhances the reputa- tion of the school. However, many schools also rec- ognize that there are other important ways to gauge a professor's worth, such as classroom excellence and corporate connections. Professor Trudeau's school viewed her as a true administrators evaluate the faculty's strengths and weaknesses—and determine where they could improve. by D.A. Osborn asset, one who added value to the school and would be costly to replace. By retaining her, they were turn- ing one of the students' favorite teachers into a human asset—and a source of competitive advantage. Major corporations constantly look for ways to measure and develop human capital. Schools that would like to follow that example often lack the tools for measuring how their professors add worth to their institutions. Corporate models for evaluat- ing human assets tend to center around value for money. They measure factors such as customer sat- isfaction, employee cost, replacement cost, and ben- efits to society. However, these models do not trans- late well to the university environment, where the "customer" may be inter- preted as the student, the student's family, the student's future employer, or even society in general. One way schools can determine how well they are satisfying their cus- tomers and meeting their overall missions is by quantifying the contributions 38 BizEd JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2006