In 2006–2007 ten public universities were utilizing responsibility center management (RCM), and that number increased to 24 in 2014–2015 (Jaquette, Kramer, and Curs, 2018), but little is known about the relationship between the implementation of RCM, faculty composition, and faculty compensation. Inequities in faculty composition and salaries exist based on gender and race/ethnicity. My study explored whether the implementation of RCM, an increasingly popular budget model in public higher education, was associated with further faculty salary and compositional inequities by gender and race/ethnicity. Deans, as heads of revenue centers under RCM, have increased budgetary power and decision-making responsibility. Organizational justice theory, specifically the tenets of distributive justice and procedural justice, grounded this study by connecting the implementation of RCM to the diffusion of decision-making throughout the organization and potential association with inequities in faculty composition and faculty compensation. This quantitative study examined the relationship of RCM with institutional average salary and numerical proportions of assistant professors on the tenure track at public, doctoral universities based on the 2015 Basic Carnegie Classification. I used difference-in-difference estimation to compare institutions that implemented RCM (treatment group) to institutions that did not (control group) to determine whether there were differences in salary and proportional trends for assistant professors by gender and by gender and race. In addition, I explored engineering in a specific set of analyses because it has been cited as a field that should especially benefit from an RCM budgeting approach. I compared the change in proportions of assistant professors of engineering by gender and by gender and race/ethnicity at universities within the sample. Finally, the annual salaries of a subset of assistant professors of engineering within the sample of doctoral institutions in the treatment and control groups in Ohio were compared. Across these different analyses, I did not find evidence that RCM implementation between FY2012 – FY2017 had a significant effect on average institutional salary generally or by gender or race/ethnicity for assistant professors broadly or within engineering, specifically. Lacking a comprehensive dataset with institutional and individual predictors of faculty compensation and composition, and as RCM models vary among institutions, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. As RCM did not appear to be associated with any changes in faculty composition or compensation practices, I did not find evidence that RCM implementation had a significant impact on the procedural justice (i.e., decision-making criteria and processes of deans or department heads) or distributive justice (i.e., salary amounts or proportions of who was hired by gender and race/ethnicity) of faculty composition or faculty compensation at public, doctoral universities. / Doctor of Philosophy / My study explored whether the implementation of responsibility center management, an increasingly popular budget model at public universities, was associated with differences in faculty salary and faculty numbers by gender and race/ethnicity. Deans, as heads of revenue centers under RCM, have increased budgetary power and decision-making responsibility. Organizational justice theory, specifically the tenets of distributive justice and procedural justice, grounded this study by connecting the implementation of RCM to the diffusion of decision-making throughout the organization and potential association with inequities in faculty composition and faculty compensation. I examined the relationship of RCM with institutional average salary and numerical proportions of assistant professors on the tenure track at public, doctoral universities. I compared institutions that implemented RCM to institutions that did not to determine whether there were differences in salary and proportions for assistant professors by gender and by gender and race/ethnicity. In addition, I explored engineering because it has been cited as a field that should especially benefit from an RCM budgeting approach. I compared the change in proportions of assistant professors of engineering by gender and by gender and race/ethnicity. Finally, the annual salaries of assistant professors of engineering at two universities in Ohio were compared. Across these different analyses, I did not find evidence that RCM implementation had a significant effect on salary or proportions of assistant professors; however, as my study had lots of limitations, and as RCM models vary among universities, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. As RCM did not appear to be associated with any changes, I inferred that RCM implementation did not have a significant impact on the procedural justice (i.e., decision-making criteria and processes of deans or department heads) or distributive justice (i.e., salary amounts or proportions of who was hired by gender and race/ethnicity) of faculty salary or proportions at public, doctoral universities.

Zhang Yanfeng. / Thesis submitted in: November 2004. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 144-147). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Abstract --- p.i / Acknowledgement --- p.iii / List of Tables and Figures --- p.v / Chapter Chapter 1 --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter Chapter 2 --- Pay-by-position System: Incentive Reform at the Case University / Chapter 2.1 --- Background of the Pay-by-position Scheme --- p.6 / Chapter 2.2 --- Chronology of the Incentive Change --- p.9 / Chapter 2.3 --- Institutional Characteristics of the Pay-by-position System --- p.11 / Chapter 2.4 --- Summary --- p.16 / Chapter Chapter 3 --- Analytical Framework and Literature Review / Chapter 3.1 --- A Brief Introduction to the Theory of Tournament --- p.21 / Chapter 3.2 --- A Simple Model of Homogeneous Two-contestant Tournament --- p.22 / Chapter 3.3 --- Implications under Multi-contestant and Multi-position-level Situation --- p.26 / Chapter 3.4 --- Status Quo of Existing Research --- p.28 / Chapter 3.5 --- Summary --- p.30 / Chapter Chapter 4 --- Empirical Models and Hypotheses / Chapter 4.1 --- Measurement of Key Variables --- p.33 / Chapter 4.2 --- Incentive Effect on Teaching --- p.41 / Chapter 4.3 --- Incentive Effect on Research --- p.48 / Chapter 4.4 --- Sorting Role of the Pay-by-position System --- p.54 / Chapter 4.5 --- Summary --- p.56 / Chapter Chapter 5 --- Data Presentation and a Preliminary Analysis / Chapter 5.1 --- Survey and Data Processing --- p.57 / Chapter 5.2 --- Description of Data --- p.61 / Chapter 5.3 --- A Preliminary Probe into Data --- p.68 / Chapter 5.4 --- Summary --- p.74 / Chapter Chapter 6 --- Empirical Analysis and Estimation results / Chapter 6.1 --- Incentive Effect on Teaching - Evidence from the Full Instructor Sample --- p.99 / Chapter 6.2 --- Incentive Effect on Research - Evidence from the Selected Sample of Responsible Professors --- p.106 / Chapter 6.3 --- Sorting Role of the Pay-by-position System - Ordered Probit Estimation --- p.114 / Chapter 6.4 --- Summary --- p.116 / Chapter Chapter 7 --- Conclusion --- p.140 / References --- p.144

The most important asset of any organization is its people (Danish & Usman, 2010). Whatever the market segment, they are the driving force behind creating and delivering on the organization’s strategic and financial objectives. The ability to attract, retain and motivate the necessary workforce, through use of financial rewards, is a main determinant in the degree to which these objectives are met (Fong & Tosi, 2007; Gomez- Mejia & Balkin, 1992b; Newman, Gerhart, & Milkovich, 2016). While there are many approaches to pay strategy, a key aspect, and the focus of this dissertation, is the market positioning of cash compensation. Specifically examined was the stated policy narrative of market positioning compared to actual pay practice. While compensation practices in the private sector have received significant research attention, much less focus has been given to pay in academia. This work seeks to address this apparent gap and extend our knowledge in this area. Utilizing faculty pay at Florida’s ten major public universities, this dissertation analyzes consistency between the narrative and practice at the levels of university, department, rank, size and region. The findings demonstrated a significant difference between pay and university but inconsistencies across all levels with the stated narrative. Additionally, the results indicate a widening gap between actual pay and the market average between the 2005- 2006 academic year to present. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2016. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection