A Professor of the Practice candidate may come into the Harvard system either through a targeted recruitment or a national search. The Dean of the Faculty of Medicine must approve all proposed targeted recruitments and searches for Professor of the Practice positions.
Process:
Step 1: Dean approves request to recruit or search for a Professor of the Practice candidate
- Department Head writes letter to the Dean requesting a targeted recruitment of, or national search for, a Professor of the Practice candidate
- If department has a specific candidate in mind, the CV should be obtained (not needed in Faculty of Medicine format at this point)
- Department submits letter and CV (if applicable) to Professorial.materials@hms.harvard.edu
- The Dean will review the request with any advisory body deemed appropriate (e.g. the Council of Academic Deans (CAD), renders a decision, and informs the Office for Faculty Affairs (OFA)
- The OFA informs Department Head of the outcome
- If approved, the recruitment process may begin and the authorization remains in effect for one year. During that period, the recruiting department may negotiate with the candidate, hire them, and if hired, should submit the materials necessary for a Professor of the Practice evaluation
Step 2: Department Head proposes candidate to Executive Committee / Preclinical Chairs (PCC) / Social Science Council (SSC)
- Department Head may identify a candidate to fill the position through an open search process (see section 5) or may select a targeted individual to fill the position
- The Department Head prepares a letter of nomination recommending the candidate for appointment to the authorized position
- The Department Head proposes the candidate to the Department Executive Committee, or in the case of the Basic Science preclinical faculty, to the PCC, or in the case of the Social Science preclinical faculty, to the SSC
- The members of these committees provide feedback to the Department Head on the proposed candidate and may recommend that the Department Head obtain additional information, deny consideration due to insufficient accomplishment, or recommend moving forward with the appointment review
- These committees evaluate and approve the “recommended reviewers list” of comparands and letter writers. See step 5 below for specific requirements for letters
- The Executive Committee makes a formal recommendation in writing to the Dean supporting the candidate’s appointment to the authorized position. If there is any dissent or abstention, this letter includes that information and explains the underlying reasons
Step 3: Department Head submits materials to the OFA
Please submit materials electronically to the OFA at: Professorial.materials@hms.harvard.edu
- Letter of nomination that outlines the candidate’s accomplishments as a practitioner and their ability to make meaningful contributions to the School’s mission, attests to the candidate’s integrity and professionalism, and establishes the case for appointment
- For candidates in basic or social science departments, documentation of approval by PCC or SSC
- For candidates in Basic or Social Science Departments, documentation of approval by the appropriate Executive Committee
- Candidate’s CV in Faculty of Medicine format
- Candidate’s Statement of Impact, which is a 1-2-page description of their public intellectual profile and the national/international impact of their work
- A recommended reviewers list from the department approved by PCC or SSC or appropriate HMS/HSDM Executive Committee outlining suggestions for letter writers and comparands. Comparands must be practitioners in the candidate’s field. This list must be submitted on the appropriate original Excel template; fields cannot be modified
Step 4: OFA initiates appointment process at HMS
Upon receipt of the candidate’s materials, the OFA will do the following:
- Request modifications or additions as needed from the department
- 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
After sharing the final list of evaluators with the Department Head, the OFA solicits letters by email. Candidates and Departments should not contact letter writers or potential letter writers directly; inquiries from letter writers should be directed to the OFA. The OFA contacts letter writers regularly to follow up on requests. Letters will be solicited from the following:
- Minimum of 12 leaders in the candidate’s field; some reviewers may be non-academic practitioners, but at least half of proposed reviewers should have academic appointments as Full Professors or their equivalent
- One (1) or two (2) letters may be obtained from Harvard Professors or Professors of the Practice
In some cases, additional letters may be solicited if the initial pool of letter writers does not yield sufficient information
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. For Basic and Social Science departments, the Department Head may ask all full Professors in the department to review the letters
- After receiving the candidate’s dossier, the department leadership makes a recommendation to the Dean regarding whether to move forward with the appointment
- 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 to submit the candidate’s most recent Faculty of Medicine CV
Step 7: Senior Appointments Committee reviews dossier
- For candidates appointed through clinical departments at institutions that have Senior Appointments Committees, those committees evaluate the dossier and make a recommendation to the Dean as to whether they support the appointment
- For candidates appointed through clinical departments at institutions that do not have Senior Appointments Committees, the CAD serves in that role
- For candidates appointed through Basic and Social Science departments, the dossier is reviewed by the PCC or SSC, depending on the candidate’s discipline
- Approval by a Senior Appointments Committee is an absolute requirement for a candidate to advance to the next step
Step 8: Council of Academic Deans (CAD) or Dean reviews dossier
- CAD reviews all candidates appointed through clinical departments. If the dossier is approved by CAD, the recommendation is forwarded to the SOP
- Dossiers for candidates in the Basic and Social Science departments who have been approved by PCC or SSC are reviewed by the Dean. If the dossier is approved by the Dean, the recommendation is forwarded to the SOP
Step 9: Subcommittee of Professors (SOP) reviews dossier
At the meeting:
- Two members of the SOP are assigned as the primary and secondary reviewers
- A representative from the candidate’s department is invited to answer questions
- The SOP discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the case
- Members of the SOP provide individual, confidential feedback and vote on the nomination
Step 10: Dean makes a recommendation to the University
- The Dean of the Faculty of Medicine reviews all recommendations from the SOP
- The OFA submits the Dean’s recommendation to the University
- No decision is final until the University review is complete
Step 11: University renders a decision
- The University reviews the proposed appointment
- A final decision is communicated to the Dean’s office and the OFA
Step 12: 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 2023