Each hiring opportunity presents a department with the opportunity to position itself for the present and the future. The position description is a comprehensive document that outlines responsibilities, essential functions, expected outcomes, reporting relationships, and required and desired qualifications. Rather than updating existing position descriptions, search committees should partner with hiring authorities to develop a list of responsibilities and qualifications likely to meet department and University needs and to attract the broadest possible candidate pool. To ensure that all who are qualified feel eligible to apply, care should be taken to describe expected outcomes rather than ways in which work should be accomplished, e.g., "disseminate information" rather than "deliver speeches" if verbal ability is not absolutely required or "travel to offsite locations" rather than "drive to remote sites" if sight and the ability to drive are not required for position success.
The stated requirements, both preferred and required, must accurately match the needs of the position. Expectations must be clearly stated and there must be no "unwritten rules." Everything that will be used as criteria in the selection process should be accounted for somewhere in the qualification requirements.
Beware of overly narrow or indefensible requirements. Is ten years of experience really more impressive than eight? Must someone be a dean currently in order to be considered for a dean position here? Is experience in a Research I university truly required? Is an MBA really required, or might a solid liberal arts degree with finance-related experience be acceptable? Is a degree in computer science required, or could significant network systems experience substitute? Committee members should challenge each other about the merits and necessity of each qualification statement in order to attract the broadest pool of qualified applicants.
Rigid selection criteria limit search committee flexibility and may unintentionally eliminate excellent candidates. When developing a list of selection criteria, the search committee should differentiate between "must haves" and "wouldn't it be nice to haves."
The committee should also develop operational definitions for each required qualification and be prepared to determine whether and when these criteria can be evaluated. For example:
| CRITERIA | EVALUATION STRATEGY |
| An earned doctorate from an accredited university | Statement on C.V. and later verification through university admissions office. (Evaluating the "quality" of a university -- e.g., "ivy" vs. state school, etc., may unintentionally eliminate qualified candidates) |
| Record of scholarly achievement | This will be defined as a minimum of 10 peer-reviewed articles in the last 3 years and will be evaluated by C.V. review |
| Strong communication skills | First screening via telephone interview; final screening during campus visit |
| Commitment to creating an inclusive classroom | This will be evaluated by reviewing the written teaching philosophy statement requested of our first group of finalists and observation during a guest seminar. |
The position announcement is used to advertise the opening. Drawn from the more comprehensive position description, it used to "sell" the opening and promote the University of Arizona. An announcement sent to potential applicants will likely be more comprehensive than an advertisement placed in a journal. Careful attention to tone and content will make the difference between an intriguing announcement and an uninspiring one.
The position announcement should include language strongly expressing the University's commitment to diversity, specifically describing requirements to meet the diversity commitments of the department. This language sends a powerful message about our commitment to becoming a diverse and inclusive University community and may result in a larger, more diverse applicant pool.
The University is required to provide public notice of its status as an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer on all recruitment materials, including bulletins, announcements, publications, and application forms. In those cases where advertising costs are a critical consideration, position announcements must minimally include the following language:
"The University of Arizona is an Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Employer- M/W/D/V" or "The University of Arizona is an EO/AA employer-M/W/D/V."
Because this statement inadequately expresses the University of Arizona's commitment to creating and sustaining a diverse and inclusive community, the recommended language for position announcements reads:
"As an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer, the University of Arizona recognizes the power of a diverse community and encourages applications from individuals with varied experiences, perspectives and backgrounds M/W/D/V."
In addition to this commitment statement, sample qualification statements might include:
When asking for application materials, search committees must ask for enough information to evaluate candidate viability, but should guard against overburdening candidates with complex application requirements. For example, asking for the names of 3-5 references is preferable to requesting 3-5 letters of reference - those can be requested AFTER the first cut. Requesting that journal article reprints be included with application materials can make it expensive to apply. Attracting the broadest possible pool requires that we make applying for employment as painless as possible. Outstanding individuals are wanted by multiple institutions. We will have greater success in attracting them by making the application process relatively straightforward. Letters of reference and expanded dossiers can be requested once a search committee determines an individual is a serious and viable candidate.
At some point during the search process, candidates may be asked to provide:
