Dataset Information

Mission-focused, productivity-based model for sustainable support of academic hematology/oncology faculty and divisions.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Adoption of a mission-focused, productivity-based funds-flow model recognizes faculty activities regardless of their primary mission and incentivizes and financially rewards both academic and clinical productivity. We describe here how such a model could be utilized for an academic division of hematology and medical oncology.

Methods

On the basis of our own experience in managing the Division of Hematology/Oncology at the University of California at Irvine, and results of a survey of hematology/oncology division chiefs, a new model was developed with clear definitions of missions (ascertaining faculty effort toward each mission and definition of productivity benchmarks for each), careful identification of revenue streams, and establishment of base and incentive salary support that rewards productivity. Ongoing performance improvement and monitoring was incorporated into the model.

Results

A model for sustainable support of hematology/oncology faculty and divisions was developed that was transparent, flexible, and had buy-in from both the faculty and departmental/school administration. Development of the model was supported by a survey of hematology/oncology division chiefs.

Conclusion

It is possible to reorganize a faculty practice and salary structure to achieve a mission-focused, productivity-based paradigm. Although the model described is specifically targeted at academic hematology and medical oncology divisions, with modification, it could serve as a framework for other departments or throughout schools of medicine.

SUBMITTER: Holcombe RF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2835485 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mission-focused, productivity-based model for sustainable support of academic hematology/oncology faculty and divisions.

Holcombe Randall F RF Hollinger Krista J KJ

Journal of oncology practice 20100219 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>Adoption of a mission-focused, productivity-based funds-flow model recognizes faculty activities regardless of their primary mission and incentivizes and financially rewards both academic and clinical productivity. We describe here how such a model could be utilized for an academic division of hematology and medical oncology.<h4>Methods</h4>On the basis of our own experience in managing the Division of Hematology/Oncology at the University of California at Irvine, and results of ...[more]

PMID: 20592779

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMany academic medical centres have introduced strategies to assess the productivity of faculty as part of compensation schemes. We conducted a systematic review of the effects of such strategies on faculty productivity.MethodsWe searched the MEDLINE, Healthstar, Embase and PsycInfo databases from their date of inception up to October 2011. We included studies that assessed academic productivity in clinical, research, teaching and administrative activities, as well as compensation, promotion processes and satisfaction.ResultsOf 531 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, we included 9 articles reporting on eight studies. The introduction of strategies for assessing academic productivity as part of compensation schemes resulted in increases in clinical productivity (in six of six studies) in terms of clinical revenue, the work component of relative-value units (these units are nonmonetary standard units of measure used to indicate the value of services provided), patient satisfaction and other departmentally used standards. Increases in research productivity were noted (in five of six studies) in terms of funding and publications. There was no change in teaching productivity (in two of five studies) in terms of educational output. Such strategies also resulted in increases in compensation at both individual and group levels (in three studies), with two studies reporting a change in distribution of compensation in favour of junior faculty. None of the studies assessed effects on administrative productivity or promotion processes. The overall quality of evidence was low.InterpretationStrategies introduced to assess productivity as part of a compensation scheme appeared to improve productivity in research activities and possibly improved clinical productivity, but they had no effect in the area of teaching. Compensation increased at both group and individual levels, particularly among junior faculty. Higher quality evidence about the benefits and harms of such assessment strategies is needed.

Project description:BackgroundFaculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation.MethodsWe surveyed the Chairs of academic Departments of Medicine in the United States in 2012. We sent a paper-based questionnaire along with a personalized invitation letter by postal mail. For non-responders, we sent reminder letters, then called them and faxed them the questionnaire. The questionnaire included 8 questions with 23 tabulated close-ended items about the types of productivity measured (clinical, research, teaching, administrative) and the measurement strategies used. We conducted descriptive analyses.ResultsChairs of 78 of 152 eligible departments responded to the survey (51% response rate). Overall, 82% of respondents reported measuring at least one type of faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. Amongst those measuring faculty productivity, types measured were: clinical (98%), research (61%), teaching (62%), and administrative (64%). Percentages of respondents who reported the use of standardized measurements units (e.g., Relative Value Units (RVUs)) varied from 17% for administrative productivity to 95% for research productivity. Departments reported a wide variation of what exact activities are measured and how they are monetarily compensated. Most compensation plans take into account academic rank (77%). The majority of compensation plans are in the form of a bonus on top of a fixed salary (66%) and/or an adjustment of salary based on previous period productivity (55%).ConclusionOur survey suggests that most academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity and convert it into standardized units for the purpose of salary compensation. The exact activities that are measured and how they are monetarily compensated varied substantially across departments.

Project description:Background: The challenge of research funding constraints has brought to bear enormous pressure on researchers. Research productivity is relevant to prestige and career progression of academic staff. However, this study aimed to explore significant challenges associated with researchers' productivity and the impact of non-funding of research in Nigerian research and tertiary institutions. Methods: This study adopted a qualitative exploratory design involving academics at various research and tertiary institutions across the six geographical regions in Nigeria. A semi-structured questionnaire was distributed electronically to all participants who consented to take part in this study. Exactly 4,159 questionnaires were administered and 2,350 were completely filled and returned. Pearson correlation matrices with logistic regression were used for data analysis and are presented in frequencies and percentages. Results: On challenges faced by respondents, 42.98% reported a lack of research funding, 17.11% mentioned brain drain challenge while 8.85% indicated a lack of motivation. Of the 23,927 publications reported, the number of those in sciences, engineering, and medical sciences averaged 9.6, 11.5, and 9.5 respectively. The average number of publications by women (10.8) was more than by men (9.7). Lecturers had the highest average research publication number (11.8) followed by researchers (10.2) and others (3.9). Men had the highest (11.9) average number of conferences compared to women (9.2). Participants in engineering had an average number of 13.8 conferences per respondents followed by those in education (11.2), sciences (11.1), and 10.9 for those in agricultural sciences. The result revealed a negative significant correlation between research publication and academic qualification at p < 0.01. Positive significant correlation was observed between research productivity and discipline at p < 0.05. Findings show that the combined influence of the independent variables on research productivity was significant using linear regression analysis. Conclusions: The failure to prioritize research has resulted in underdevelopment in Nigeria. It is therefore imperative that the federal government prioritize research and establish a functional Special Research Trust Fund to oversee research funding in Nigeria.

Dataset Information

Mission-focused, productivity-based model for sustainable support of academic hematology/oncology faculty and divisions.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Mission-focused, productivity-based model for sustainable support of academic hematology/oncology faculty and divisions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets