Additional Information


Case 47. Maintaining Confidentiality of Faculty Hiring Decisions


Professor Johnson, a faculty member of the State University sociology department, was angry about the way in which the decision for selecting one of two finalists for a new position in the department was handled. Some members who were not at the final selection and vote meeting had indicated their preference and left a “proxy” with the chair of the department. He had never seen this practice before, and others who were unable to attend the meeting had not been told that a proxy vote was possible. The vote was a tie, with the chair making the final decision in favor of the candidate whom was not Professor Johnson's choice. Professor Johnson described the discussion at the meeting and tie vote to Betsy Candidate, his first choice for the position, to indicate to her the substantial support she had among the faculty (although she was not offered the position) as well as to inform her of the questionable way the voting was carried out.


  1. Was it appropriate for Professor Johnson to discuss the faculty hiring selection meeting with the job candidate?
  2. Were there any options he could have pursued to voice concerns about the selection meeting that would not violate the confidentiality of the hiring decision meeting?

Reflect on the above questions and form your own answers before clicking the discussion key to review the commentary provided with this case.