Academic Year 2009-2010
MIS Salary Survey Results (final)

Editor: Dennis Galletta
University of Pittsburgh

Note: This is not the newest version of the salary survey. Please click here for the 2010-2011 page

Scope

Although this survey can and does represent wages from anywhere in the world, this survey makes use of U.S. dollars for comparing and averaging, and forces respondents to do a one-time conversion, freezing the numbers at a point in time. There are advantages and disadvantages from making these simplifying assumptions, but this (over)simplification has been chosen. Philosophically, also, is the fact that in different countries there are different salary models at work. In the U.S. the modal situation is that a faculty salary is high enough to raise a family quite comfortably. In many other countries, there are large numbers of universities that provide extremely low pay, requiring faculty to supplement their pay with substantial amounts of consulting. This survey is not very meaningful for situations in which you need several other engagements to support a family. In many countries there is wide variance on this issue, and some schools pay comfortable wages for university teaching. For those schools this survey can be useful. Thus, the school, not the country, would determine the usefulness of this survey.

Instructions

To enter your data, use the anonymous or non-anonymous form. Also, you might press the refresh or reload button to make sure you have the latest version.

To analyze these data, download the Excel Spreadsheet with Pivot Table, generously provided by Ido Millet of Penn State Erie. The large spreadsheet is useful for slicing and dicing the data to provide meaning to the data. For example, on the chart page, one useful approach for a U.S. research school looking to see average salaries for an assistant professor would be to click on where it says "All" next to the Country tab, and click USA, click on the "All" next to the Teaching/Research tab and select "research," and finally to click "All" next to "Candidate Education" and select "PhD/DBA." Because major salary points are determined by these three factors, you should select your desired combination of these three selections before drawing any conclusions about salaries. Caution: the sample size might become rather small depending on your combination, making the graph exhibit large swings.

Description

These data represent reports by candidates of their academic job offers in Information Systems for the academic year 2009-2010. A new survey will begin each academic year in September. Please feel free to browse the following:

Results: Excel Spreadsheet

Click here for Excel Spreadsheet with Pivot Table

Results: HTML Tables and Analysis:

Results by Academic Year

[2010-2011 (so far)]
[2009-2010] [Analysis]
[2008-2009] [Analysis]
[2007-2008] [Analysis]
[2006-2007] [Analysis]
[2005-2006] [Analysis]
[2004-2005] [Analysis]
[2003-2004] [Analysis]
[2002-2003] [Analysis]
[2001-2002] [Analysis]
[2000-2001] [Analysis]
[1999-2000] [Analysis]
[1998-1999] [Analysis]

Some entries were submitted non-anonymously; please do not contact me to discover the identity of any of the entries.

Please use these data at your own risk; there is no guarantee that respondents were truthful, entered the data without error, or represent an unbiased sample of the population.

See the cautions below on importing the table into a spreadsheet.

Results so far:

#

Identity
revealed?

Years
teaching

Educ.

Top Tier*
Journal
Pubs

Other
refereed
Journal
Pubs

Textooks
Published

Research Books
Published

Other
Publications

Salary

Summer
Support
per year

Years of
Summer
Support

Research
budget

Moving
Support

Course
Load

Tenure Req
Level (Note 12)

Number
of "A"
Pubs
Required
for tenure

Number
of Pubs
Required
for tenure

Position

Campus
type

Public
or private

Union?

Country

Region

School's
highest
degree

School's
highest
accredit.

Accepted?

1

yes

8

Phd/DBA

4

1

14

15000

0

0

8

1

0

1

instructor

suburban

private

Turkey

unspecified

Bachelor

Regional

Have accepted

2

yes

5

Phd/DBA

0

4

0

1

10

105000

20000

3

6000

5000

4

2

2

5

Asst

urban

private

X

U.S.

US W.

Masters

National

Have accepted

3

.5

Phd/DBA

0

2

0

0

6

95000

0

0

2000

2000

6

2

0

7

Asst

suburban

public

United States

US S.

Doctorate

National

Have accepted

4

yes

2

Phd/DBA

1

1

1

20

110000

20000

2

3000

5000

3

2

4

10

Asst

urban

mixed

X

USA

US N.E.

Masters

National

Have accepted

5

2

Phd/DBA

1

2

1

0

0

93000

5000

4

3000

6

1

Asst

urban

unspecified

unspecified

USA

unspecified

Masters

National

Have accepted

6

yes

1

Phd/DBA

2

0

0

0

3

91500

2500

1

4000

2000

6

2

0

4

Asst

suburban

private

usa

US N.E.

Masters

unspecified

Have accepted

7

yes

2

Phd/DBA

0

2

0

0

4

85000

0

6000

4000

6

1

0

5

Asst

rural

private

US

US M.W.

Bachelor

Regional

Have accepted

8

yes

8

Phd/DBA

0

14

0

1

3

100,000

5,000

3,500

12

1

0

0

switched Asst

urban

public

USA

US S.

Masters

National

Have accepted

9

2

Phd/DBA

2

0

0

0

4

126000

0

5000

10000

4

2

20

80

Asst

suburban

private

U.S.A.

US W.

Masters

National

Have accepted

10

3

Phd/DBA

0

5

11

95000

0

3000

3000

6

2

0

5

Asst

urban

public

unspecified

Masters

National

Have accepted

11

1

Phd/DBA

1

1

0

0

3

95000

0

0

0

1000

6

2

0

5

Asst

urban

mixed

USA

US S.

Bachelor

National

Have accepted

12

1

Phd/DBA

1

1

97500

10000

8

unspecified

instructor

suburban

private

US N.E.

Masters

National

might accept

13

1

Phd/DBA

0

1

0

0

1

80000

0

0

8

1

0

2

Asst

suburban

private

USA

US M.W.

Masters

Regional

might accept

14

7

Phd/DBA

1

3

85000

4

1

0

6

Asst

urban

public

US S.

Bachelor

Regional

Have accepted

15

yes

1

Phd/DBA

0

1

84000

0

3000

0

10

0

0

0

Asst

urban

private

USA

US M.W.

Masters

National

Have accepted

16

8

Phd/DBA

1

5

0

0

6

120000

0

0

2000

4

2

1

6

switched Asst

suburban

public

X

USA

US S.

Masters

National

Have accepted

17

2

Phd/DBA

1

4

11

87,000

0

2,000

1,000

6

1

0

3

Asst

rural

public

USA

US M.W.

Bachelor

Regional

Have accepted

18

5

Phd/DBA

1

3

80000

0

3000

1500

8

1

5

switched Asst

urban

public

USA

US N.E.

Doctorate

National

Have accepted

19

yes

0

Phd/DBA

0

2

0

0

6

95000

0

0

2000

2000

4/6

2

0

8

Asst

urban

public

USA

US S.

Doctorate

National

Have accepted

20

5

Phd/DBA

0

8

30

60,000

3,000

4

2

0

3-4

associate/tenure

urban

public

X

New Zealand

unspecified

Doctorate

National

Have accepted

21

9

Phd/DBA

0

0

0

0

10

88000

0

0

2000

1000

6

1

0

5

switched Asst

rural

public

USA

US W.

Doctorate

Regional

Have accepted

22

2

Phd/DBA

1

5

90000

0

3

2000

8000

4

2

3

8

Asst

urban

private

USA

US N.E.

Doctorate

National

won't accept

23

0

Phd/DBA

1

1

4

72000

5

1

Asst

rural

public

X

Canada

unspecified

Bachelor

unspecified

Have accepted

24

yes

3

Phd/DBA

2

1

0

0

8

106,000.00

11,660.00

2

2500.00

10,000.00

5

2

2

7

switched Asst

suburban

public

USA

US N.E.

Masters

National

Have accepted

25

10

Phd/DBA

0

14

0

6

47

135000

0

0

4000

0

7

unspecified

assoc/not tenured

urban

mixed

USA

US N.E.

Doctorate

National

Have accepted

26

10

Phd/DBA

0

14

0

6

47

65000

0

0

1500

0

6

1

full/chair

urban

public

X

Fiji

unspecified

Masters

none

won't accept

27

yes

2

Phd/DBA

0

1

0

0

6

59,432

0

1000

15,700

3

unspecified

Asst

urban

public

X

New Zealand

unspecified

Doctorate

Regional

Have accepted

 

* Top tier: Respondents were asked to provide the number of journal publications accepted (both in print and forthcoming) in journals in this list: (MISQ, CACM, ISR, Management Science, JMIS, Decision Sciences, IEEE Transactions, HBR) (these are journals appearing in the top 10 of over half of the scales shown in the Saunders compilation here on ISWorld, listed above in the order in which they appear in the Saunders list.

Appendix: Data Issues

The following entries were not added to the database for the reasons indicated.

NONE

#

Identity
revealed?

Years
teaching

Educ.

Top Tier*
Journal
Pubs

Other
refereed
Journal
Pubs

Textooks
Published

Research Books
Published

Other
Publications

Salary

Summer
Support
per year

Years of
Summer
Support

Research
budget

Moving
Support

Course
Load

Tenure Req
Level (Note 12)

Number
of "A"
Pubs
Required
for tenure

Number
of Pubs
Required
for tenure

Position

Campus
type

Public
or private

Union?

Country

Region

School's
highest
degree

School's
highest
accredit.

Accepted?

Recommendations

For analysis, the best approach is to use Ido Millet's (Penn State Erie) Excel Pivot Table analysis tool, available above. If you choose to copy to your own spreadsheet, beware that some of the entries need to be "cleaned" (such as 2/9 for summer support needs to be translated to a dollar amount). If you still want to capture these data yourself, just click and drag all of the cells, copy to the clipboard, then paste into a spreadsheet package. This works well with Excel 97 and above (with Internet Explorer 4.01 and above); but does not work well with Netscape 4* or when using Lotus1-2-3 version 97 (even when parsing columns). You can then analyze the data by sorting by fields of interest, removing rows, computing averages, etc. One very practical approach for department heads to argue for parity is to focus only on schools with teaching loads similar to yours.

*Note: Thanks are in order for Mary Brabston and Vance Cooney. Mary helped me learn about the incompatibility between Netscape and Excel for the procedure outlined above. Vance Cooney of Xavier offers a remedy: "Since I use Netscape exclusively, I saved it as a text file then opened the saved file in Word and did some global replaces to clean it up for import. Once in a database program like Access or FileMaker Pro its cake to select by rank and/or load etc. to slice and dice the data." Also thanks to Steven Morris for advice on capturing research requirements independent of teaching loads. Finally, thanks to Shu Schiller for suggesting that numeric fields should be aligned right.

Limitations

The object of interest is offers, which most likely repeats a given individual. If this concerns you, sort by the "accepted" field before using the data, then concentrate on "Have accepted" in your analysis; these will be unique individuals.

Notes

  1. The "Identity revealed" field addresses questions of trust in the data; some deans will not use anonymous data as the basis for any salary decisions. Note that the identity is revealed only to me; please do not ask me to violate my pledge of confidentiality.
  2. Salary is Base Salary (exclusive of summer support) in US $
  3. Guaranteed Summer Support is stated in US $, for the period of time shown.
  4. The "research budget" indicates amounts of discretionary spending (including travel, technology, and optional secretarial services, but not including required items such as course software, basic telephone, and copying). If not specified separately, an amount was estimated for maximum travel and technology that would reasonably be supported without special requests (or appeals).
  5. Moving support in US $ also includes any signing bonuses.
  6. Course load is an annual teaching load, stated in semester-course equivalents, defined as number of 3-credit semester courses (roughly 3 hrs/week, 15 weeks) to be taught. Thus, a 3+3 (3 fall + 3 spring = 6-course) load would be entered as 6
  7. "Public or private" indicates whether a school is perceived to be substantially public, substantially private, or mixed.
  8. Unions often have large impacts on salary, and unionized business schools are often well below market (beyond their control).
  9. School attributes such as country and region can also affect salaries.
  10. The school's highest degree granted in business administration is listed.
  11. Accreditation is listed as national, such as AACSB, regional, such as Middle States, and local, such as state or county.
  12. Tenure requirements levels:
    (blank): No tenure system
    Level 0: No publications are required
    Level 1: Publications are required, but outlet quality does not matter
    Level 2: Some outlets are weighted more heavily than others
    Level 3: Outlets are weighted, but non-"A" outlets actually can count negatively