University academics’ preferences for hiring and promotion systems

Figures & data

Figure 1. Changes in university hiring and promotion systems in Spain. Source: Authors’ elaboration.

Table 1. Variables and descriptive statistics.

	N	Min	Max	Mean value or share	Standard error
Dependent variable
Preference for accreditation (Yes)	4460	0	1	.49	.007
Independent variables
1. Self-interest
Accredited to upper rank (Yes)	4460	0	1	.26	.007
Eligible for promotion (Yes)	4460	0	1	.82	.006
2. Beliefs and values
Belief that the accreditation system is the most adequate system for merit-based selection (Yes)	4460	0	1	.39	.007
Appraisal index of the situation of promotion in the university system	4460	1	7	3.78	.029
3. Personal experience and learning
Promoted to current post under accreditation system (Yes)	4460	0	1	.35	.007
Experience in the accreditation process (Yes)	4460	0	1	.16	.006
Experience in university top management (Yes)	4460	0	1	.04	.003
Degree of professional satisfaction	4460	1	5	3.52	.015
4. Institutional and socialization factors
Strongly inbred (Yes)	4460	0	1	.51	.007
International experience (Yes)	4460	0	1	.67	.007
Universalism index	4460	1	5	3.51	.012
Control variables
Gender (Female)	4460	0	1	.37	.007
Age	4460	25	84	48.86	.142
Field of science [science, engineering and biomedical (FOS-1,2,3,4)].	4460	0	1	.53	.007
Top quality researcher (Yes)	4460	0	1	.10	.005
Research as preferred activity (Yes)	4460	0	1	.27	.007

Table 2. Models predicting the probability of preferring the current accreditation system.

Factors and variables (reference category)	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Final Model
1. Self-interest
Accredited to upper rank (yes)	.522***	.544***	.537***	.565***	.593***
Eligible for promotion (yes)	.619***	.625***	.589***	.557***	.779*
2. Beliefs and values
Belief that accreditation is the most adequate system for merit-based selection (yes)		.167***	.183***	.183***	.173***
Appraisal index of the situation of promotion in the university system		1.211***	1.192***	1.199***	1.194***
3.Personal experience and learning
Promoted to current post under accreditation system (yes)			.695***	.710***	.817*
Experience in accreditation processes (yes)			.619***	.624***	.603***
Experience in university top management (yes)			1.694*	1.679*	1.520*
Degree of professional satisfaction			1.108*	1.126**	1.139**
4. Institutional and socialization factors
Strongly inbred (yes)				.881	.906
International experience (yes)				.729***	.816**
Universalism Index				1.088	1.074
Control Variables
Gender (female)					.907
Age					.972***
Field of science (science, engineering and biomedical)					1.153*
Top quality researcher (yes)					1.304*
Research as preferred activity (yes)					1.208*
Constant	1.659	2.332	1.899	1.477	3.728
Pseudo R-square (R^2 Nagelkerke)	.045	.287	.308	.313	.327
Observations (n)	4460	4460	4460	4460	4460

Note: Coefficients shown [exp(B)] can be interpreted as changes in probability; ***p < .001 **p < .01 *p < .05.

Appendix A1 . Correlation matrix.

		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
Preference for accreditation	1	1	.163**	.124**	.432**	.220**	.191**	.135**	−.078**	.092**	.049**	.073**	−.015	.061**	−.172**	−.033*	−.061**	−.057**
Accredited to upper rank	2	.163**	1	.253**	.117**	−.029	.049**	−.081**	−.078**	−.106**	.017	.131**	.012	.022	−.208**	−.031*	−.036*	−.076**
Eligible for promotion	3	.124**	.253**	1	.053**	.057**	.059**	−.189**	−.258**	−.116**	.014	−.091**	−.011	.158**	−.478**	−.015	−.244**	.123**
Belief that accreditation is the most adequate system for merit-based selection	4	.432**	.117**	.053**	1	.190**	.184**	.151**	−.019	.091**	.019	.050**	−.043**	.008	−.014	−.001	−.020	−.042**
Appraisal index of the situation of promotion in the university system	5	.220**	−.029	.057**	.190**	1	.090**	.045**	−.019	.241**	.113**	−.088**	−.117**	.126**	−.041**	−.010	−.076**	.082**
Promoted to current post under accreditation system	6	.191**	.049**	.059**	.184**	.090**	1	.390**	−.085**	.075**	.028	.071**	−.028	.062**	−.285**	−.012	.003	−.013
Experience in the accreditation process	7	.135**	−.081**	−.189**	.151**	.045**	.390**	1	.007	.079**	.010	.077**	−.026	−.001	.032*	.017	.057**	−.081**
Experience in university top management	8	−.078**	−.078**	−.258**	−.019	−.019	−.085**	.007	1	.053**	−.021	.038*	−.066**	−.048**	.201**	.024	.079**	−.004
Degree of professional satisfaction	9	.092**	−.106**	−.116**	.091**	.241**	.075**	.079**	.053**	1	.032*	−.049**	−.173**	−.023	.075**	−.003	.039**	.023
Strongly inbred	10	.049**	.017	.014	.019	.113**	.028	.010	−.021	.032*	1	−.066**	−.071**	.043**	−.048**	−.048**	−.039**	.048**
International experience	11	.073**	.131**	−.091**	.050**	−.088**	.071**	.077**	.038*	−.049**	−.066**	1	.016	−.001	−.151**	.050**	.106**	−.197**
Universalism index	12	−.015	.012	−.011	−.043**	−.117**	−.028	−.026	−.066**	−.173**	−.071**	.016	1	−.008	−.004	.001	−.025	−.070**
Sex	13	.061**	.022	.158**	.008	.126**	.062**	−.001	−.048**	−.023	.043**	−.001	−.008	1	−.131**	.062**	−.077**	.038*
Age	14	−.172**	−.208**	−.478**	−.014	−.041**	−.285**	.032*	.201**	.075**	−.048**	−.151**	−.004	−.131**	1	.026	.105**	.088**
Field of science	15	−.033*	−.031*	−.015	−.001	−.010	−.012	.017	.024	−.003	−.048**	.050**	.001	.062**	.026	1	−.031*	.010
Top quality researcher	16	−.061**	−.036*	−.244**	−.020	−.076**	.003	.057**	.079**	.039**	−.039**	.106**	−.025	−.077**	.105**	−.031*	1	−.078**
Research as preferred activity	17	−.057**	−.076**	.123**	−.042**	.082**	−.013	−.081**	−.004	.023	.048**	−.197**	−.070**	.038*	.088**	.010	−.078**	1

**Correlation significative at 0.01 (bilateral).

*Correlation significative at 0.05 (bilateral).