• Section 1 - Purpose
• Scope
• Section 2 - Policy
• Section 3 - Procedures
• Part A - Promotion Rounds
• Part B - Preparing to Apply
• Part C - Applying for Promotion
• Application
• Head of Department Report
• Supporting Evidence
• Referees
• Referees Nominated By the Applicant
• Independent Referees
• Part D - Assessment of Application
• Committee Composition Requirements
• Faculty Panel
• Faculty Panel Assessment Process
• Faculty Promotion Committee (FPC)
• University Promotion Committee (UPC)
• Verification Checks
• Part E - Outcome Notification
• Part F - Appeals
• Part G - Out-of-round Promotion
• Part H - Exemptions
• Part I - Conflict of Interest
• Section 4 - Guidelines
• Section 5 - Definitions
• Forms and Templates

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) The purpose of this Procedure is to outline the process for promotion of academic staff at Macquarie University. This Procedure also ensures that the process for promotion of academic staff at the University is consistent, transparent and fair.

Scope

(2) This Procedure applies to all continuing and fixed-term academic staff, whether full-time or part-time, who seek promotion to Levels B, C, D or E.

(3) This Procedure does not apply to:

1. casual academic staff; or
2. honorary appointees, except Conjoint title holders per the Honorary Academic Titles Policy.

Section 2 - Policy

(4) Refer to the Academic Promotion Policy.

Section 3 - Procedures

(5) The Academic Promotion Procedure Flowchart - Level B and Academic Promotion Procedure Flowchart - Levels C - E are available to guide applicants through the standard promotion process.

(6) A Conjoint Academic Promotion Procedure Flowchart is available for applicants holding Conjoint Appointments, outlining the specific steps relevant to their promotion pathway.

Part A - Promotion Rounds

(7) There is one promotion round per calendar year.

Part B - Preparing to Apply

(8) Applicants should discuss their intention to apply for promotion with their academic supervisor and Head of Department. Applicants who are considering applying for promotion to Level E should discuss their intentions with the Executive Dean.

Part C - Applying for Promotion

Application

(9) All applications for promotion must include the following documents:

1. completed Application for Promotion form;
2. current Curriculum Vitae (CV);
3. Head of Department Report; 
4. letter of Support from Clinical Head and Clinical Supervisor (Conjoint Academic Promotion applicants only); and
5. feedback form from previous unsuccessful promotion (if applicable).

(10) Applicants may also submit additional supporting evidence and, where relevant, evidence of exemption from a general rule or requirements.

(11) Applicants must ensure that the eligibility requirements stated in the Academic Promotion Policy are met before submitting their promotion application.

(12) Applications to Levels C, D and E will only be considered complete if all documents are submitted in Workday by 11:59 PM on the application closing date. Incomplete applications will not be considered.

(13) Late applications will only be considered under exceptional and unavoidable circumstances, subject to the written approval of the applicant’s Executive Dean.

(14) Applications for Level B will be considered twice a year in May and August. Applications must be submitted to the applicant’s Head of Department by close of business on the application closing date. Incomplete applications will not be considered.

(15) Applicants do not need to address all five categories for promotion: Discovery, Integration, Education, Citizenship and Leadership in their promotion application. The only mandatory category that must be addressed by all applicants is Citizenship and Leadership.

(16) The word limit in the application form for Discovery, Integration, Education, and Application is 500 words per pillar. The Citizenship and Leadership criterion must be addressed in two distinct sections, each with a word limit of 250 words.

(17) All applications require the inclusion of a current CV. The CV should be no longer than 10 pages.

Head of Department Report

(18) The Head of Department Report is prepared by the Head of Department and must be endorsed by the Executive Dean.

(19) Where the Head of Department is applying for promotion, the Head of Department is to consult with the Executive Dean. The Executive Dean will nominate another member of staff to assume responsibility for completing the Head of Department Report.

(20) The purpose of the Head of Department Report is to:

1. detail the standards of performance expected of academic staff in the department; and
2. consider the applicant’s performance against these standards (relative to opportunity, workload allocation and nature of appointment) and whether or not the applicant meets criteria for promotion.

(21) It is the responsibility of the applicant to:

1. advise the Head of Department of their intention to apply in the current round;
2. provide the Head of Department with a copy of their application; and
3. provide the Head of Department with sufficient time for the preparation of the Head of Department Report.

(22) If the applicant does not agree with or wishes to clarify the comments made by the Head of Department, the applicant may provide a response to the Head of Department Report and submit it with their application.

Supporting Evidence

(23) Applicants may wish to include up to five (5) pieces of evidence with their application in support of their performance and achievements.

(24) The page limit for supporting evidence is 10 pages.

(25) Applicants may be called upon at the time of their interview to provide a specific source of evidence or supporting material, for example, a particular research publication or teaching evaluations. Advance notice will be given to applicants if additional evidence is required. Applicants must ensure they have an Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCid) and that their information is up to date in the Research Management System as it may be referred to by the Committee during the process.

Referees

(26) The following referee requirements must be met:

(27) A senior esteemed referee can be an academic or a senior business or community leader and must have experience and esteem in the applicant’s discipline, and knowledge of the applicant’s work. 

Referees Nominated By the Applicant

(28) The applicant-nominated referee should be a level higher than the applicant’s current level.

(29) Applicants should not provide referees with whom they have a familial or personal relationship. Professional friendships and collegial relationships are normal and expected. 

(30) Applicants are not required to obtain and submit referee reports. Similar to a recruitment process, referees will be contacted by the University to complete a reference for the applicant. It is, however, the applicant's responsibility to obtain the referee’s agreement to provide a reference before nominating them in the application.

Independent Referees

(31) Following the submission of the application, the University, on the recommendation of the Executive Dean, will invite one independent referee for applicants to Level C and two independent referees for Levels D and E.

(32) An independent referee must be someone external to the University at the level of Professor or of equivalent standing in industry, government or community, who has not worked directly with the applicant in the last five (5) years and who is recognised in their field and can provide an objective assessment of the quality of the applicant’s work.

(33) The process will be as follows:

1. The Head of Department will provide the Executive Dean with a list of suggested names (three for Level C and five for Levels D and E), ensuring that appropriate referees are selected in terms of providing an independent assessment of an application and there is no conflict of interest (e.g. they are not former supervisors or co-authors). The Head of Department may consult with others when selecting independent referees.
2. The Executive Dean will rank the nominated referees.
3. The Office of the Executive Dean will contact the first referee for Level C and first two (2) referees for Levels D and E on the rank-ordered list to see if they are willing to serve. If a nominated referee is unavailable, the next referee on the list will be approached. Confirmed referees will then be asked to complete a reference for the applicant.

(34) The applicant should not be advised of the final selection of independent referees.

Part D - Assessment of Application

(35) Applications for Level B will be considered by a faculty panel consisting of:

1. the Executive Dean;
2. the Deputy/Associate Dean (depending on the applicant’s job family); and
3. an Academic Member external to the Faculty.

(36) Applications for Level C will be considered by a relevant Faculty Promotion Committee (FPC) following interviews.

(37) Applications for Levels D and E will be considered by a relevant Faculty Promotion Committee following interviews.  Final determinations will be made by the University Promotion Committee (UPC), in accordance per the table below.

(38) It is the responsibility of the applicant to make themselves available for the interview.

Committee Composition Requirements

(39) The following requirements apply to all Faculty Promotion Committees and University Promotion Committees:

1. The term of office for committee members, except ex officio, is three (3) years;
2. All members must be at least at the same academic level or above as that to which promotion is sought and no lower than Level C;
3. A staff member cannot be a member of both the FPC and UPC for the same level. Executive Deans are excluded from UPC membership;
4. Committees must, as far as possible, be gender balanced;
5. Committees should have appropriate representation from different discipline areas as far as possible;
6. A committee member may request that the Executive Dean nominate a replacement member, if there are valid reasons why they cannot attend or continue serving on the committee; and
7. All committee members must have completed unconscious bias training.

Faculty Panel

(40) The role of the Faculty Panel is to assess Level B applications for promotion for the relevant Faculty and determine the outcome.

Faculty Panel Assessment Process

(41) The Faculty Panel Assessment Process is as follows:

1. The applicant’s Head of Department will submit their application to the Executive Dean along with a Head of Department report;
2. Depending on the applicant’s job family, the Executive Dean will form a Faculty Panel;
3. The Faculty Panel will review all application documents in accordance with the Academic Promotion Policy and this Procedure;
4. The Faculty Panel may request additional evidence from applicants;
5. Following consideration of all application documents the Faculty Panel will make a determination. The decision of the Faculty Panel is final.

Faculty Promotion Committee (FPC)

(42) The role of the FPC is to assess applications for promotion for the relevant Faculty, interview applicants and:

1. for applications to Level C, determine the outcome of applications; or
2. for applications to Levels D and E, make recommendations that will be further considered by the UPC.

FPC Membership

(43) FPC committees for all levels must have the following membership:

1. Executive Dean, ex officio – Chair;
2. Deputy or Associate Dean from the faculty;
3. External academic member from another faculty;
4. Member of Academic Senate; and
5. Academic member from the faculty.

FPC Assessment Process

(44) The FPC Assessment Process is as follows:

1. The FPC will review all application documents and confidential referee reports in accordance with the Academic Promotion Policy and this Procedure.
2. The FPC will interview applicants who have applied for promotion to Levels C, D and E. The purpose of interviews is to provide an opportunity for applicants to speak to their case for promotion and for members of the promotion committees to seek clarifications on matters within a promotion application.
3. Heads of Department/School and any nominated individuals who have written a Head of Department report for an applicant are not permitted to serve as a member of the Faculty Promotions Committee panel in any round where a member of their Department/School has applied for promotion.
4. The FPC may request additional evidence from applicants. The FPC should provide applicants with advance notice of the need to view additional evidence.
5. Following interviews, all FPC members will vote, which may be by secret ballot, to:
   1. promote;
   2. not promote; or
   3. not promote but offer accelerated progression within current level.
6. The FPC may conduct a non-binding vote, followed by discussion and a final vote which will be binding.
7. If there are 30% or more votes against promotion in the final vote, the applicant will not be recommended for promotion.
8. All committee members must vote (i.e. no abstentions) unless they have been absented from the committee because of a previously declared conflict of interest (see Part I - Conflict of Interest).
9. The FPC Chair will prepare a report including:
   1. recommendations to promote or not promote for each applicant; and
   2. reasons for the recommendations with reference to the relevant criteria.
10. Applicants are permitted to bring a support person with them to interviews. The support person will be an observer only and can not participate in the interview process.
11. For applications to Level C, the FPC determination will be final.
12. For applications to Levels D and E, applications and recommendations from the FPC will be submitted to the UPC for further consideration.

University Promotion Committee (UPC)

(45) The role of the UPC is to consider the applications for promotion to Levels D and E together with the recommendations from the corresponding Faculty Promotion Committees and determine the outcome of these applications.

UPC Membership

(46) The UPC for Level D must have the following membership:

1. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic), ex officio – Chair;*
2. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research), ex officio – Chair;*
3. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (People and Operations), ex officio;
4. Chair, Academic Senate, ex officio;
5. External academic member from another university;
6. Academic member from the Faculty of Arts;
7. Academic member from the Macquarie Business School;
8. Academic member from the Faculty of Science and Engineering; and
9. Academic member from the Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences.

(47) The UPC for Level E must have the following membership:

1. Vice-Chancellor, ex officio – Chair;
2. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic), ex officio;
3. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research), ex officio;
4. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (People and Operations);
5. Chair, Academic Senate, ex officio;
6. External academic member from another university;
7. Academic member from the Faculty of Arts;
8. Academic member from the Macquarie Business School;
9. Academic member from the Faculty of Science and Engineering; and
10. Academic member from the Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences.

(48) A representative from HR will attend all UPC meetings but will not have voting rights.

UPC Assessment Process

(49) The UPC Assessment Process is as follows:

1. The UPC will review all applications to Levels D and E and the recommendations from the FPC.
2. The UPC may ask the Executive Dean of the relevant faculty to attend the UPC and speak to applications from their faculty.
3. All UPC members will vote, which may be by secret ballot, to:
   1. promote;
   2. not promote; or
   3. not promote but offer accelerated progression within current level.
4. The UPC may conduct a non-binding vote, followed by discussion and a final vote which will be binding.
5. If there are 30% or more votes against promotion in the final vote, the applicant will not be recommended for promotion.
6. All committee members must vote (i.e. no abstentions) unless they have been absented from the committee because of a previously declared conflict of interest (see Part I - Conflict of Interest).
7. The UPC's decision is final. If the UPC's decision differs from the recommendations of a FPC, the Chair of the UPC should provide feedback to the Chair of the FPC.

Conjoint Appointments Promotion Assessment Process

(50) The Conjoint Academic Promotion Assessment Process is as follows:

1. The FPC or a stand-alone faculty committee will review application documents and confidential referee reports and interview applicants in accordance with the Academic Promotion Policy and this Procedure.
2. For applications to Levels B and C, the FPC or stand-alone faculty committee determination will be final.

1. For applications to Levels D and E, recommendations from the FPC or stand-alone faculty committee will progress to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) for endorsement.
2. If approved by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) the decision will progress to the UPC for noting and approval.
3. Formal delegation approval rests with the Vice-Chancellor.

Verification Checks

(51) The University reserves the right to make inquiries to verify information provided in the application, including off- list reference checks where appropriate.

Part E - Outcome Notification

(52) Promotion Committee Chairs must advise the outcome of the promotion process face-to-face, by telephone or email as soon as possible, following the last meeting for each academic level, in the following order:

(53) HR will send out notification letters to all applicants.

(54) Unsuccessful applicants are encouraged to meet with the Executive Dean to discuss feedback and may also seek feedback from the UPC Chair. Applicants may bring a colleague for support to this meeting.

(55) The Faculty Panel or FPC chair will provide unsuccessful applicants with a feedback form. Applicants should use this advice, in consultation with their performance supervisor, when revising Development and Performance Review plans. Applicants are unlikely to be successful in subsequent promotion rounds unless they have addressed recommendations from the Promotions Committee and may wish to make this explicit in their application.

Part F - Appeals

(56) Applicants may appeal against the decision of the Promotion Committee only if:

1. the published academic promotion procedure was not followed; and
2. this failure had a material effect on the decision not to recommend promotion.

(57) The Promotion Committee’s assessment of the academic merit of an application is final and will not be the subject of appeal. This includes assessment against the promotion criteria.

(58) To appeal the Promotion Committee decision, an applicant must:

1. seek advice and further information, as necessary, directly from the Chair of the Promotion Committee on the reason(s) for the decision not to promote; and
2. detail the allegations that may demonstrate that the University failed to follow the procedures set down, that this failure had a material effect on the decision not to promote, and that, as a consequence, the case should be reheard; and
3. submit the appeal in writing to the Chief People Officer with the necessary supporting information, within twenty (20) working days after receipt of verbal notification from the Chair of the FPC or UPC of the outcome of the original application.

(59) In exceptional circumstances, such as illness or misadventure, the applicant may request an extension to the twenty (20) working day appeal submission deadline. For the extension to be granted it must be approved by:

1. the Chief People Officer; and
2. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

(60) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) will nominate members of the Appeals Committee. The membership will comprise:

1. a Chair nominated by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic);
2. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic), or nominee if the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) was a member of the associated Promotion Committee; and
3. two (2) academic Level E staff members.

(61) HR will provide the Appeals Committee with copies of:

1. written statements from the applicant;
2. written statement from the Chair of the associated Promotion Committee(s) and any other person the Appeals Committee considers relevant to the conduct of the appeals process; and
3. all promotion application documents submitted to the Promotion Committee(s).

(62) The Appeals Committee will review the documentation and will provide a written recommendation (Appeals Committee Report) to the Vice-Chancellor, giving reasons as to why the appeal should be:

1. dismissed; or
2. upheld.

(63) The Vice-Chancellor will review the recommendation of the Appeals Committee and will make a determination. The Vice-Chancellor's decision is final.

(64) Where the Vice-Chancellor chaired a UPC subject to an appeal, the Vice-Chancellor will nominate a Deputy Vice-Chancellor to consider the appeal and determine the outcome.

(65) If the appeal is upheld the decision will be referred back to the original Promotions Committee for reconsideration (FPC for Level B and C applicants, and UPC for Level D and E applicants). The Promotions Committee will refer to the information originally provided as part of the promotions process and any additional information related to the appeal. The Committee will apply the Academic Promotion Policy and this Procedure, resulting in a decision on whether or not the applicant should be promoted.

(66) If the appeal is not upheld, the application will not be reconsidered and no further appeal will be entertained.

Part G - Out-of-round Promotion

(67) There may be legitimate circumstances when a promotion needs to occur outside the scheduled promotion round as outlined in the Academic Promotion Policy.

(68) An out-of-round promotion application must include:

1. a business case specifying the exceptional circumstances and level of promotion requested;
2. the applicant’s CV; and
3. relevant supporting documentation, e.g. job application and letter of offer from the relevant institution or references from external experts in the same discipline.

(69) The out-of-round promotion application must be completed and endorsed by the Head of Department and relevant Executive Dean and submitted by the Executive Dean to the Chief People Officer.

(70) The application for out-of-round promotion will be considered jointly by:

1. the Chief People Officer;
2. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic); and
3. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research).

Part H - Exemptions

(71) There may be legitimate circumstances where there should be an exception to the standard rules and processes outlined in the Academic Promotion Policy and this Procedure.

(72) An applicant may seek an exemption if:

1. the applicant has worked for less than two (2) years at Macquarie University since commencement or last promotion; or
2. the applicant is seeking promotion to a level that is more than one level higher than their current level (e.g. seeking promotion from Level B to Level D); or
3. the applicant is seeking promotion to several levels in the same round (e.g. seeking promotion from Level B to Level C and Level D in the same round); or
4. the applicant does not otherwise satisfy the requirements of the policy to apply for promotion (excluding casual and honorary appointments).

(73) An exemption application must include:

1. a business case specifying the exceptional circumstances as to why the standard rules should not apply and level of promotion requested;
2. the applicant’s CV; and
3. relevant supporting documentation (if applicable).

(74) An exemption application must be endorsed by the Head of Department and relevant Executive Dean and submitted by the Executive Dean to the Chief People Officer.

(75) The exemption application will be considered jointly by the Exemptions Committee:

1. the Chief People Officer;
2. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic); and
3. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research).

(76) If exemption is granted, the application for promotion can be lodged and considered through the normal application process. Applicants must submit evidence that the exemption was granted (e.g. an email from HR advising approval from the Exemptions Committee) with their application for promotion. Granting exemption does not mean that the application for promotion is approved.

(77) If exemption is not granted, the Chief People Officer will advise the applicant and provide reasons for the decision. The decision is final and is not subject to appeal.

Part I - Conflict of Interest

(78) In accordance with the Conflict of Interest Policy, each person involved in the promotion process, including all members of a Promotion Committee, are required to consider whether there is any actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest. This may include a business, personal or familial relationship with an applicant.

(79) If any person involved in the promotion process identifies such a conflict, they must declare it to the Promotion Committee Chair as soon as possible.

(80) If a conflict of interest is declared, the Chair will determine an appropriate management plan, in accordance with the Conflict of Interest Policy. Conflicts of interest can normally be effectively managed, with disclosure and transparency being the key principles. If the member remains on the Committee, their views should be canvassed last. In the circumstance where a conflict of interest is deemed sufficient, the member may be required to be absent during the decision-making process.

(81) Declaration of Conflict of Interest will be a standing agenda item at all Promotion Committee meetings. All declared conflicts of interest and the associated management plans will be recorded in the relevant documentation from the meeting.

(82) If a conflict of interest is identified between the applicant and their independent referee, Human Resources may ask the applicant’s Executive Dean to provide the name of an alternate independent referee, or the Promotion Committee/s may elect to disregard the referee report.

Section 4 - Guidelines

(83) Nil.

Section 5 - Definitions

(84) The following definitions apply for the purpose of this Procedure:

1. Discovery: the pursuit of new knowledge and understanding; the outcomes, process and passion that add value to discovery.
2. Integration: linking and connecting disciplines; giving meaning and perspective to original research and/or research fields; connecting discovery with curriculum; illuminating and interpreting discoveries to bring new insight; changing practice at University.
3. Education: maintaining the continuity of human knowledge via dynamic exchange of ideas to facilitate active learning; encouraging and equipping students with critical, creative thinking; instilling the ability and passion for learning, and actively linking all forms of scholarship.
4. Application: activities that link universities with society, the translation and application of knowledge and discovery to the broader community; a two-way flow where knowledge can inform application and application can inform discovery; connecting students with, and embedding learning into applied practice.
5. Citizenship and leadership: modelling the University values of genuine care, purposeful collaboration, bold innovation and collective ambition through decisions, behaviour, and interpersonal interactions. As a leader, demonstrating an active and meaningful contribution to the University and the broader community, and embracing mentorship of staff and students.

Forms and Templates