marketing marketing a study of hiring institutions and job candidates
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Marketing Marketing: A Study of Hiring Institutions and Job Candidates

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 18

Marketing Marketing: A Study of Hiring Institutions and Job Candidates - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 119 Views
  • Uploaded on

Marketing Marketing: A Study of Hiring Institutions and Job Candidates. Michael D. Basil Debra Z. Basil. Overview. There is a shortage of faculty in the field of marketing. Basil & Basil (JBR, 2006) found that both undersupply and mismatch appear to be responsible for the shortage.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Marketing Marketing: A Study of Hiring Institutions and Job Candidates' - fausta


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
marketing marketing a study of hiring institutions and job candidates

Marketing Marketing: A Study of Hiring Institutions and Job Candidates

Michael D. Basil

Debra Z. Basil

overview
Overview
  • There is a shortage of faculty in the field of marketing.
  • Basil & Basil (JBR, 2006) found that both undersupply and mismatch appear to be responsible for the shortage.
  • How can we reduce mismatches?
study of hiring institutions
Study of Hiring Institutions

PURPOSE

  • This paper will present a summary of studies on academic hiring comparing the views of
    • Hiring institutions
    • Job candidates
  • To compare what hiring institutions and job candidates were looking for.
  • How can we reduce the mismatch?
study of hiring institutions1
Study of Hiring Institutions

METHOD

  • Survey of institutions that advertised a job
  • Sample was drawn from about 180 hiring institutions
    • (US and international).
  • 99 responses (55% rate).
  • 9 reported that they did not have a position
    • (the position was cut).
study of hiring institutions2
Study of Hiring Institutions

RESULTS

  • Rank
    • 28 (31%) were looking for assistants,
    • 10 (11%) for an associate,
    • 7 (8%) for full professors,
    • 6 (7%) reported that the rank was open.
  • Restricting to the tenure track:
    • 55% assistant,
    • 20% associate,
    • 14% full, and
    • 12% open
study of hiring institutions3
Study of Hiring Institutions

SEARCH

  • Average of:
    • 13.5 AMA interviews
    • 4 candidates to campus
    • 2 offers
  • Only 28 of 90 (31%) reported a successful hire.
    • 11 (12%) were still in process.
    • Most of the remaining institutions (51) did not hire.
      • 7 institutions were not able to hire the candidate of their choice.
      • 6 couldn’t find an acceptable candidate.
study of hiring institutions4
Study of Hiring Institutions
  • Most important factor in selecting a candidate?
    • Teaching ability
      • 36 schools
      • M = 2.8 (1-10 scale, 1 = very important).
    • Research ability
      • 34 schools.
      • M = 2.7 (1-10 scale, 1 = very important).
    • Fit
      • with job (31 schools, M = 3.4),
      • with colleagues (35 schools, M = 4.3)
study of hiring institutions5
Study of Hiring Institutions

Candidate’s “mistakes” in applying

  • Not targeting (lack of match, too many schools)
  • Not enough research on the school
    • (reading the job ad, finding out about the school, etc.).

Mistakes that candidates made in interviewing

  • Not enough focus on the needs of the hiring institution
  • Lack of homework
  • Inadequate preparation/research presentation
  • Seeming arrogant or overpromising.
study of job candidates
Study of Job Candidates

PURPOSE

  • To learn what candidates were looking for in a school.
  • To examine their perceptions of the job search process (interviews and offers).
  • To determine how their choice compared to their ideal.
study of job candidates1
Study of Job Candidates

METHOD

  • A survey of academic job candidates
    • 93 respondents
      • US and international institutions
study of job candidates2
Study of Job Candidates

RESULTS

  • Job search
    • Average of 13.7 AMA interviews [0-33].
      • (Matched the # interviews reported by schools)
    • Average 5 on-campus invitations [0–17]
    • 3.7 campus visits [range 0-7]
    • 2.3 job offers [range 0-7].
    • 80 (86%) report accepting an offer
study of job candidates3
Study of Job Candidates
  • Teaching areas
    • Consumer behavior (50, 54%)
    • Marketing research (41, 44%)
    • Marketing management and strategy (34, 37%)
    • E-commerce (30, 32%)
    • Marketing theory/principles (25, 27%)
    • International (25, 27%)
    • Global marketing (20, 22%)
      • [multiple responses possible]
study of job candidates4
Study of Job Candidates
  • Research areas:
    • Consumer behavior (49, 53%),
    • E-commerce (33, 35%)
    • Advertising (23, 25%)
    • “Other” (22, 24%)
    • International marketing (21, 23%)
    • Marketing management and strategy (20, 22%)
      • [multiple responses possible].
study of job candidates5
Colleagues (M = 5.3)

Research support (M = 5.5)

Research expectations (M = 5.9)

Number of classes taught (M = 5.9)

Salary (M = 6.0)

Location of the school (M = 6.2)

Atmosphere (M = 6.4)

School reputation (M = 7.7)

Spousal consideration (M = 8.3)

Conference/travel support (8.9)

Cost of living (9.1)

Benefits (9.7)

Study of Job Candidates

What were candidates looking for in a job?

(Rank ordering from 1 to 14)

study of job candidates6
Study of Job Candidates

How did schools compare?

  • Respondents rated their school on a 1-to-5 scale.
  • Results showed little variance –
    • range between 3.6 (cost of living) and 4.4 (colleagues).
  • Candidates identified things schools did well or poorly during the hiring process.
    • Frequent communication was a key strength (when it occurred) and weakness (when they weren’t kept informed).
    • A number of candidates were bothered by unprofessional conduct by the interviewer (such as appearing drunk).
conclusions
Conclusions
  • Schools want candidates to:
    • match the job
    • do their homework
    • examine needs of hiring institution
  • Candidates want:
    • good colleagues
    • research support
    • reasonable research expectations
    • reasonable teaching expectations
conclusions1
Conclusions
  • SO… Attracting candidates
    • Colleagues and research support
      • Main interest in colleagues
      • Followed closely by research support
    • Consider building “areas” of interest
      • Collaboration and mentorship
    • Show professionalism in recruitment
      • Communication and other intangibles
conclusions2
Conclusions
  • Reducing mismatches…
      • Flexibility!
  • Find ways to flex
    • Examples:
      • Hire in CB,
        • Move existing faculty to needs
      • Hire from outside business
        • Psych, Econ, Comm
        • AQ versus PQ
ad