Universities are making vocal commitments to recruit faculty who represent the diversity of the student population. At the same time, they struggle to retain the women and minoritized faculty who they have recruited. Moreno at al. (2006) referred to this as the ‘revolving door’ problem, finding that one in every two minority hires was a replacement for a previous minority who had left the institution.
Tenure is a key moment at which people exit university doors, perhaps because the doors slammed shut. Recent stories of prominent Black scholars being denied tenure (e.g., Nikole Hannah-Jones at University of North Carolina and Dr. Cornel West at Harvard) reveal a broader systemic pattern. Research on tenure denials confirms that women and minorities are more likely to be denied tenure, even when controlling for productivity. 
Dr. Donna Y. Ford
Our focus is on the high-level biases that affect numerous minoritized groups and undermine the overall quality and fairness of promotion and tenure discussions. Our de-biasing recommendations are drawn from the well-established literature on groups, decision making, and culturally responsive, anti-racist practices. These are simple and often costless strategies, and many are already used widely in corporate hiring practices.
We present the problems/solutions as an easily accessible 10-point checklist, so that you can grade your own processes, identify your challenges, and proactively incorporate de-biasing practices in the spirit of equity, diversity, and inclusion.
1. Tenure meetings involve groupthink and status effects, with the loudest, most powerful voices dominating. Committee members often arrive unprepared. Those from marginalized groups may not feel psychologically safe to dissent.
Recommendations:
· Pre-work: University should provide departments with an anonymous, structured evaluation forms (with decision criteria and clear rubrics, just as is used to facilitate fairness in student grading) to rate the candidate both quantitatively and qualitatively. Committee members should evaluate the candidate independently, prior to group discussion to minimize peer pressure.
