Current practices in the external peer review process for promotion and tenure decisions

This study extends previous work by Schwartz and Schroeder [Schwartz, B. N., & Schroeder, R. G. (1997). External reviews: what is being done? Journal of Accounting Education, 15, 531–547] regarding the use of external peer reviews in the promotion and tenure process. Specifically, we examine issues raised by Schwartz and Schroeder's (1997) survey respondents related to guidance provided by institutions to external reviewers. Using information collected from 35 responding institutions, we detail current practices in accounting in the following guidance areas: (1) benchmarks for evaluating the candidate; (2) specific evaluation criteria for research, teaching, and service; and (3) candidate and institutional materials sent to the reviewer to assist in the evaluation. We find considerable diversity in current practice, with some institutions listing multiple, detailed criteria to guide reviewers and others providing little or no guidance. Using our findings and insights from prior literature (primarily outside accounting), we identify potential strengths and weaknesses in current practice and make recommendations for improvement in the peer review process. The recommendations contained herein should be helpful to schools currently dissatisfied with their external review process, to schools considering revising the way they solicit external reviews, and to schools considering using external reviews in the future.