Academic promotion is meant to be a recognition of achievement, a milestone in a career dedicated to research, teaching and engagement. But does it also act as a barrier to collaboration?
The structure of promotion – particularly at the lower or early career grades – arguably encourages an individualistic approach to career progression. Academics know what they need to do, the boxes they need to tick and the outputs they must produce to move forward. But when career advancement becomes a rigid, criteria-driven exercise, does it risk pulling focus away from the bigger picture?
None of this is to say that collaboration doesn’t happen in academia – of course it does. The academy thrives on intellectual exchange, teamwork and knowledge-sharing. But could there be more of it if we removed the spectre of promotion – the ever-present awareness that every decision, project and publication must serve an individual career trajectory? If the promotion process were seen as a flexible, long-term career journey rather than a series of hoops to jump through, could we unlock even greater collective impact?
The pressure to tick the right boxes
Many academics, particularly those at the start of their careers, feel the pressure of the promotion framework acutely. While promotion criteria are often designed to be broad and flexible, they are frequently interpreted – and sometimes applied – in rigid ways. This is particularly true when institutions try to ensure fairness and transparency by making expectations explicit. Clarity is valuable, but when the criteria are presented as checklists rather than guiding principles, they can drive a transactional approach to career development.
- Prepare for promotion: how to develop a strategy for success
- How professional supervision can benefit academics
- Playing the promotion game: how to navigate upshifting
As a result, early-career academics often become completely focused on meeting specific targets rather than shaping their careers in a way that feels meaningful. They know they need a certain number of publications, particular types of teaching experience, examples of leadership and a demonstrable level of impact. Anything that does not clearly fit into these categories may feel like a distraction – even if it has long-term value.
This is not to say that senior academics are immune to the pressures of promotion. But as careers progress, there is often greater scope for autonomy and a broader perspective on what really matters. A professor is perhaps more likely to see promotion as part of a journey rather than an end in itself. The challenge is ensuring that this mindset is nurtured earlier in an academic’s career, so they see themselves as part of a wider community rather than just an individual trying to get to the next level.
Collaboration as a casualty?
One of the unintended consequences of this system is that it can make collaboration feel like a risk. Genuine collaboration – the kind that takes time to develop, where contributions are shared rather than neatly attributed – doesn’t always map easily on to promotion criteria.
If an academic spends time mentoring colleagues, co-authoring work where their contribution is not the lead or engaging in activities that are valuable but hard to quantify, they may worry that they are diverting energy away from what counts towards promotion. This is a rational concern in a system where promotion is based on individual achievements, rather than collective contributions.
And yet, the irony is that collaboration is at the heart of great scholarship. The most significant breakthroughs often come from interdisciplinary partnerships, co-authored research and shared teaching innovations. If we want universities to be places where knowledge is co-created, then we need a culture that rewards – and does not inadvertently penalise – those who invest in academic community-building.
A subtle shift in mindset
A senior colleague recently told me, “Promotion is a milestone, not the endpoint. You need to define your story and the narrative of where you are going.” That really resonated. If more academics viewed their careers as long-term narratives rather than short-term tick-box exercises, we might foster a more open, engaged academic culture.
So what can we do? For institutions, the challenge is to ensure that promotion frameworks are truly enabling rather than restrictive. This does not mean removing structure or transparency – both are necessary – but ensuring that flexibility is actively encouraged in practice.
For individual academics, particularly those in their early career, the challenge is to think beyond immediate criteria and ask: What kind of academic do I want to be? What do I want my career to stand for? If we keep these questions at the forefront, we might find it easier to balance what we need to do with what we want to do.
If we can shift perspectives – both institutionally and individually – we might move beyond transactional career-building and towards something more meaningful. Promotion will still matter, but it will be a step along the way rather than the defining force in how we shape our academic lives. And in doing so, perhaps we will create the conditions for even greater collaboration, innovation and collective impact.
Nick Quinn is senior lecturer in entrepreneurship at the University of Glasgow.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment