College of Engineering Conflict of Interest Policy Related to Promotion and Tenure Process
College of Engineering faculty members who serve on any Primary Committee, the Engineering Area Promotions Committee, and/or the University Promotions Committee shall recuse themselves from deliberations and decisions regarding a candidate if there is a past or current relationship which compromises, or could have the appearance of compromising, a faculty member’s judgment with regard to the candidate. The following list, while not exhaustive, illustrates the types of relationships which constitute a conflict of interest:
- A marital, life partner, family, or dating/romantic/sexual relationship
- An advising relationship (e.g., the faculty member having served as the candidate's PhD or post-doctoral advisor)
- A direct financial interest and/or relationship
- Any other relationship that would prevent a sound, unbiased decision
Conflicts of interest shall be disclosed to the appropriate individual(s). Members of promotion committees shall recuse themselves from discussions and decisions related to any candidate who presents a conflict of interest. Recusal due to a conflict of interest with one candidate does not prevent a faculty member from participating in deliberations and decisions regarding other candidates.
In the case where the school head has a conflict of interest, the school Primary Committee will elect a full professor to chair that part of the meeting where the specific case is discussed. This person will also make the presentation to the EAPC and draft the Form 36 paragraph, subject to compliance with University policies. The representative in this case will be allowed to vote in the EAPC, for this case only. However, if the head does not normally vote in the primary committee this same person will not vote at the Primary Committee.
In the case where the dean has a conflict of interest, the dean will recuse himself of herself. The EAPC will elect a member to chair that portion of the meeting. The elected person will write the dean’s summary required for Form 36. Representation of the candidate at the University Promotion Committee will be decided in consultation with the Provost.
Approved by the EAPC March 31, 2005, revised by the EAPC, April 19, 2007