AIS, ISWORLD NET, and the University of Pittsburgh announce the results of last year's MIS Faculty Salary Offer Survey and the kickoff of the survey for the 2002-2003 academic year, both available at http://www.pitt.edu/~galletta/salarysurvey.htm.
The final spreadsheet, in Excel 2000 Pivot Table form, is available by clicking here. Thanks to Ido Millet of Penn State Erie for graciously providing this tool.
2001-2002 RESULTS: We appreciate the number of entries (N=145) this year. The most important statistic in my informal analysis is that the average offer for new U.S., PhD assistant professor hires (the largest subgroup, N=73) was $90,368 (up 12.6% from last year's $81,482).
This year, including all data points, the overall average salary is $91,661, compared with $84,819 in 2000, $77,431 in 1999 and $68,702 in 1998. This represents an 8.1% increase over 2000, which was a 9.5% increase over 1999, which in turn was a 12.7% increase over 1998. The amount of the increase is largest in research institutions for all ranks. This number is not very meaningful because it cuts across all ranks, but it provides a starting point for understanding the sample.
Omitting all offers from other countries and omitting all Masters degree faculty raises the average salary overall from 91,661 to $94,065, and raises the average new assistant salary offer from $90,368 to $92,562, as noted in the table below.
The 22 PhD/US/Assistant respondents who chose to reveal their identities averaged $88,750, which is about $2,500 less than the average of $91,287 (those 50 who chose not to reveal their identities). The difference is not significant (two-tailed p=.5281).
The correlation between salaries and teaching load is much stronger than last year, at -.6223. The correlation between summer support and teaching load is weaker than last year, at -.3323.
|$91,661||Average salary overall (n=145)||up 8.1%||$84,819||$77,431||$68,702|
|$94,065||US only, PhD only (n=129)||up 8.2%||$86,922||$78,375||$68,928|
|$98,066||In research institutions (teaching load of 4 or below; n=103)||up $6,476|
|$75,952||in teaching institutions (teaching load > 4; n=42)||up $674|
|$96,038||Associate professors (n=25)||up 5.5%||$91,000||$82,717||$71,563|
|$107,850||in research institutions (n-17)||up $3,850|
|$70,938||in teaching institutions (n=8)||down $ 10,313|
|$90,368||New assistant professors only (n=73)||up 10.9%||$81,482||$76,894||$67,569|
|$92,562||US only, PhD only (n=62)||up 12.6%||$82,244||$77,901||$67,435|
|$94,462||in research institutions (n=56)||up $7,746|
|$76,882||in teaching institutions (n=17)||up $4,271|
|$90,632||Assistant professors switching to a new school (n=38)||up 8.4%||$83,646||$76,071||$70,679|
|$98,065||in research institutions (n=23)||up $ 8,386|
|$79,233||in teaching institutions (n=15)||up $ 1,620|
|$17,650||Average summer support (caution: n=118)
(caution: only includes offers with summer support)
|$19,443||in research institutions (n=93 of 103 have it)||up $2,079|
|$11,056||in teaching institutions (n=25 of 42 have it)||up $3,874|
|4.4||Average teaching load *||down -6.4%||4.7||4.9||4.9|
|3.7||in research institutions (up .1)|
|6.3||in teaching institutions (up .1)|
-0.622 correlation between teaching load and salary
-0.332 correlation between teaching load and summer support
* Note: last year, teaching institution offers were 41.5% of the data set; this year, they comprise 29% of the data set. Although teaching loads have not changed in each category, the difference in the mix is the only factor that has lowered the overall teaching load.
A “course” is considered to be in 3-credit equivalents, which counts for 45 nominal class hours (including breaks) times 4=180, or 37.5 teaching hours times 4=150. As before, a maximum teaching load of 4 courses per year defined "research institutions," and those schools above 4 courses per year were labeled "teaching institutions." Even though schools with higher teaching loads often value and even require research productivity, it seems logical to categorize the schools based on this single, explicit, and quantifiable indicator of a school’s support (not just desire) for research. Although it is an imperfect measure, it does capture much of the decision process of candidates, who consider 180 nominal class hours (including breaks) or 150 teaching hours to be the limit for what they consider a research orientation. (Note: thanks to Merrill Warkentin for discovering a typo in this paragraph and requesting more clarification, both of which I hope I have addressed)
I took the liberty this year of removing one data point for an item that was said to have been for a PhD who accepted an offer of $6,000 in the U.S. at a doctoral-granting institution. The data point was obviously incorrect--it specified that this was a "switched assistant" with zero years of teaching experience.
This Year’s Survey
This year, we are continuing to allow candidates to choose either an anonymous or non-anonymous (only to Dennis) entry. More candidates than ever before have chosen to reveal their identities to me. We will try something new this year; AIS will collect similar information from the schools who are using the placement service. We will compare the numbers to provide further evidence that these numbers can be used by schools with confidence.
Anonymous submissions are certainly appreciated, but in the past some deans stated that they did not wish to pay attention to anonymous data. It seems that we need a substantial body of verified/verifiable data for extending the impact of the survey. A non-anonymous entry will simply have a "yes" in the "identity revealed?" column as before.
We hope you find the results from last year interesting and useful, and that we receive a large number of submissions once again this year, especially with identities revealed!
Page Editor: Salary Survey and AIS VP of Member Services