7.3.1. Promotion to Professor of Clinical X

Harvard Medical School

Section 7 Table of Contents

Institutional and departmental review processes incorporate an evaluation of the candidate’s Faculty of Medicine CV and assessment as to whether the academic criteria for promotion appear to be met.

After the Department Head recommends advancing a candidate to review for promotion to Professor of Clinical X, they bring the candidate’s nominating letter, CV, annotated ten (10) most significant scholarly contributions, statement of impact, and list of potential evaluators to the appropriate departmental executive committee for review and approval.

Faculty members are encouraged to discuss periodically their eligibility for promotion with appropriate department leaders such as mentors, Division Chiefs, and/or Department Heads. For each candidate, the following factors will be considered in making a decision as to when to initiate a promotion evaluation:

  • Substantial accomplishment since the candidate’s appointment as Associate Professor with contributions that have resulted in a national, and in many cases international, impact in and reputation for advancing the practice of medicine with a primary focus within one of the following domains of contribution:
    • Knowledge synthesis: Knowledge synthesis or novel application of clinical knowledge to formulate and advance best practices in medicine or care delivery and their uptake 
    • Educational leadership: Educational leadership and generativity in medical education (undergraduate, post-graduate, faculty development, and/or continuing professional education)
    • Administrative leadership in academic medicine
    • Health equity: Transformative service and leadership that advances health equity and the quality of health and health delivery in minoritized, socially marginalized, or other underserved communities
  • Established record of clinical expertise
  • Established record of clinical excellence
  • Established record of teaching excellence (including mentorship) with meaningful contributions to teaching at Harvard and its affiliated institutions
  • If applicable, accomplishments in other domains may be encapsulated as Significant Supporting Activities that are additive to (but not duplicative of) the primary domain of contribution (e.g., Administration and Institutional Service; Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; Education of Patients and Service to the Community)
  • Adherence to the Faculty of Medicine policies supporting the highest level of integrity and professionalism

If the appropriate executive committee recommends advancing the candidate to review for promotion to Professor of Clinical X, the Department Head prepares and submits to the Office for Faculty Affairs (OFA) the materials needed to initiate the promotional process at HMS. At any time in the process, the OFA may seek confidential consultation from the Council of Academic Deans (CAD) regarding the proposed promotion.

Process:

Step 1: Department assesses candidate’s qualifications for promotion
  • The process begins with a meeting of the Department Head (or designee such as a mentor or Division Chief) and the candidate, ideally as part of the annual career conference, to discuss the process and review the candidate’s Faculty of Medicine CV in consideration of the academic criteria for promotion to Professor of Clinical X
  • Academic Department Heads are the only individuals who can propose candidates for promotion to Professor of Clinical X
  • Candidate prepares CV, statement of impact, and annotated list of ten (10) most significant scholarly contributions in the required Faculty of Medicine format
  • The Department Head determines readiness for promotion and develops a rationale for advancement. Department works to prepare the “recommended reviewers list” of comparands, external letter writers, internal letter writers, and 360-style survey recipients
Step 2: Department Head proposes candidate to Executive Committee
  • The Department Head prepares a letter of nomination recommending the candidate for promotion
  • The Department Head proposes the candidate to the Department Executive Committee
  • The members of the Executive Committee provide feedback to the Department Head on the proposed candidate and may recommend that the Department Head obtain additional information, delay consideration pending achievement of additional accomplishments by the candidate, or recommend moving forward with the promotion review
  • The committee evaluates and approves the recommended reviewers list of comparands, external letter writers, internal letter writers, and 360-style survey recipients. See step 5 below for specific requirements for letters and surveys
  • The Executive Committee makes a formal recommendation in writing to the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine supporting the candidate’s promotion. If there is any dissent or abstention, the letter to the Dean includes the reasons for either dissents or abstentions
Step 3: Department Head submits materials to the OFA

Department submits materials electronically to the OFA at: Professorial.materials@hms.harvard.edu

  • Letter of nomination describing the candidate’s contributions that have resulted in a national, and in many cases international, impact in and reputation for advancing the practice of medicine for which the candidate’s clinical expertise and excellence is expected to be integral, attests to the candidate’s integrity and professionalism, and establishes the case for promotion
  • Documentation of approval by the appropriate Departmental Executive Committee
  • Candidate’s CV in the Faculty of Medicine format, including the narrative
  • Statement of impact
  • Annotated summary of the candidate’s ten (10) most significant scholarly contributions
    • The impact in advancing the practice of medicine should be relevant to their clinical expertise and excellence
    • The 10 contributions should reflect a trajectory of recent impact in advancing the practice of medicine  
    • May include a broad array of written contributions, or descriptions thereof, that support evidence of impact through clinical expertise and excellence
  • Candidate’s ten (10) most significant scholarly contributions as PDFs, as appropriate
  • A recommended reviewers list from the Department, approved by the appropriate Executive Committee, outlining suggestions for letter writers and comparands. This list must be submitted on the appropriate original Excel template; fields cannot be modified
  • A list of 360-style survey recipients (see Step 5)
Step 4: OFA initiates promotion process at Harvard Medical School

Upon receipt of the candidate’s materials, the OFA will:

  • Provide access to a confidential milestone website for tracking the status of the promotion available to the candidate, the Department Head, and the department promotion coordinator
  • Send an email to the candidate, with a copy to the department, to alert them that the materials have been received, the HMS evaluation process has started, and the website is available
  • Request modifications or additions as needed from the department or the candidate
  • Document on the milestone website when all materials are complete, i.e., that any revisions/additional material requested by the OFA in support of the professorial evaluation have been received (revisions may include modifications to the Faculty of Medicine CV, nominating letter, statement of impact, annotated bibliography and ten (10) most significant scholarly contributions, and the recommended reviewers list, among other requests that may be appropriate to assist in completion of the package)
  • Review the recommended reviewers list submitted by the Department Head. Identify advisor(s) from inside or outside Harvard to assist the Dean’s office regarding the appropriateness and completeness of the lists. Once that review is complete, a final list is proposed to the department
Step 5: OFA solicits letters of evaluation / Department solicits 360-style surveys

After sharing the final recommended reviewers list with the Department Head, the OFA solicits letters by email. The OFA contacts letter writers regularly to follow up on requests. Candidates and Departments should not contact letter writers or potential letter writers directly; inquiries from letter writers should be directed to the OFA. Letters will be solicited from the following:

  • Minimum of 12 leaders (generally Professors) in the candidate’s field whose appointments are outside Harvard. Up to half of the letters may be from faculty members with Professor of Clinical X or analogous titles. These evaluators, at least half of whom should not be colleagues or collaborators, will be asked to compare the candidate to 3-5 peers with analogous titles at a similar stage of their careers as the candidate and who are not appointed at Harvard
  • Six Professors at Harvard who are not appointed in the candidate’s local department but who are familiar with the candidate’s field, and often his/her achievements in other relevant areas. When possible, up to three letters should be from individuals who have direct experience observing or collaborating with the candidate in clinical settings.
  • In some cases, additional letters may be solicited if the initial pool of letter writers does not yield sufficient information

Meanwhile, the Department Head solicits 360-style surveys electronically (using a form template available from the OFA) from individuals who will be able to speak to the candidate’s clinical excellence based on direct observation and collaboration in clinical settings, as well as teaching excellence if able:

  • Physicians or physician-equivalents within and outside of the candidate’s department (must have 9, including 6 who have direct experience observing or collaborating with the candidate in clinical settings). Professors in this list (up to 3) are eligible to serve as internal letter writers as well
  • Other health professionals (must have 1 but no more than 3)
  • Post-graduate clinical trainees (must have 1 but no more than 3)
Step 6: Department leadership reviews dossier
  • Once the letters of evaluation are received, the OFA prepares a confidential dossier that is shared with the candidate’s Department Head
  • Meanwhile, once the requisite number of 360-style surveys are received, the Department submits the results (numerical summary and raw data) to the OFA
  • After receiving the candidate’s dossier with letters and 360s, the department leadership makes a recommendation to the Dean regarding whether to move forward to review by the Professor of Clinical X Review Committee. Approval by the Department Head is an absolute requirement before a case advances to the review committee
  • The Department Head has an opportunity to revise and update the original nominating letter to incorporate information from or address issues raised in the letters of evaluation and/or the 360-style survey results, and/or to submit the candidate’s most recent Faculty of Medicine CV
Step 7: Senior Appointments Committee reviews dossier
  • The Senior Appointments Committee will evaluate the dossier and make a recommendation to the Dean as to whether they support moving forward to the Professor of Clinical X Review Committee
  • For institutions that do not have Senior Appointment Committees, the Council of Academic Deans (CAD) will serve as the Senior Appointments Committee
  • Approval by the Senior Appointments Committee is an absolute requirement before a case advances to the Professor of Clinical X Review Committee
Step 8: Professor of Clinical X Review Committee reviews dossier
  • The Committee reviews the dossier to determine the candidate’s achievements in the primary domain, including evidence a national and in many cases international, impact and reputation on the field. The Committee also evaluates the record of clinical expertise, clinical excellence, teaching expertise, and any Significant Supporting Activities described in the professorial dossier
  • A second member of the committee reviews the dossier and reports to the committee
  • The Department Head or other senior department representative is invited to testify to the committee
  • Following all testimony, the committee meets in executive session to review the qualifications for promotion. If the Committee requires additional evidence before reaching a conclusion, the Committee is empowered to request that such additional data (e.g., additional letters of evaluation) be solicited by the OFA
  • At the conclusion of the meeting, the members will vote on the proposal
  • Professors in the Faculty of Medicine also have the opportunity to provide confidential comments by email to the Dean. This confidential commentary will not be shared with department leadership, the candidate, or the Professor of Clinical X Review Committee. Any general concerns raised in these emails may be discussed, without attribution to their origin, with faculty and leaders involved in the promotion decision as appropriate
Step 9: Dean makes a recommendation to the University
  • The Dean of the Faculty of Medicine reviews all recommendations from the Professor of Clinical X Review Committee
  • The OFA submits the Dean’s recommendation to the University
  • No decision is final until the University review is complete
Step 10: University renders a decision
  • The University reviews the proposed appointment
  • A final decision is communicated to the Dean’s office and the OFA
Step 11: Notification of approval
  • The OFA informs the Department Head and/or CEO/President of the outcome via email
  • Formal letter from the Dean is sent directly to candidate
  • Formal letter is sent from the University directly to candidate

Last updated June 2024