Performance of a Career Development and Compensation Program at an Academic Health Science Center

OBJECTIVE. The academic physicians of our department developed a novel Career Development and Compensation Program to outline job expectations, enhance career development, and provide a peer-review process to assess performance. The Career Development and Compensation Program was founded on the principle that sustained achievement in education, clinical care, or research should be valued, supported, and rewarded in an equivalent manner and that reward for clinical work should not be limited by the focus of the university on research and education. The objective of this study was to determine whether the principles of the Career Development and Compensation Program were sustained during the initial 7 years of its implementation. METHODS. The outcome of the 7 triennial reviews that occurred from 1999 to 2005 was evaluated. For the purposes of some analyses, physicians were classified as predominately clinical (clinician-specialists and clinician-teachers), predominately education (clinician-educators), or predominately research (clinician-investigators and clinician-scientists). RESULTS. Each of the job profiles had a similar probability to increase a level within the Career Development and Compensation Program at the time of triennial review. Similarly, all 5 job profiles had a similar rate of increase in their level in relation to the total number of years of experience at an academic health science center. Neither the university academic rank nor gender of the physician affected the probability of increasing a level at the time of the triennial review. CONCLUSION. The peer-reviewed Career Development and Compensation Program recognizes sustained achievement in each area of education, clinical care, and research in an equivalent manner with no detectable effect of academic rank or gender.

[1]  H. O'Brodovich.  Career development and compensation: strategies for physicians in academic health science centers. A perspective from a Canadian academic health science center. , 2001, The Journal of pediatrics.

[2]  B. Gewertz,et al.  Measuring faculty effort and contributions in medical education. , 2000, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[3]  W. Fisher,et al.  A relative‐value‐based system for calculating faculty productivity in teaching, research, administration, and patient care , 1997, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[4]  S. Kaplan,et al.  Sex differences in academic advancement. Results of a national study of pediatricians. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  M. Weisfeldt,et al.  Compensation to a department of medicine and its faculty members for the teaching of medical students and house staff. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  S. Shea,et al.  Promotion of women physicians in academic medicine. , 1995, JAMA.

[7]  J. Ruedy,et al.  Linking budgets to desired academic outputs at Dalhousie University , 1995, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[8]  A. Nattinger,et al.  Promotion of women physicians in academic medicine. Glass ceiling or sticky floor? , 1995, JAMA.

[9]  R. Carey,et al.  Evaluating faculty clinical excellence in the academic health sciences center , 1993, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[10]  R. Haslam,et al.  Alternative funding plans: is there a place in academic medicine? , 1993, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[11]  H. O'brodovich,et al.  Evaluation of a peer-reviewed career development and compensation program for physicians at an academic health science center. , 2003, Pediatrics.