Page 201 - Through the gate of the neoliberal academy • Herschberg
P. 201

APPENDICES 199
             A
8b. Were the decisive criteria used in the selection of
the appointed candidate mentioned in the formal job description?
9. Do you consider the appointed person an excellent candidate? Why?
Earlier research indicated that the formal criteria of excellence are almost not realistic, and appointed candidates often do not meet this standard of excellence (see Van den Brink & Benschop, 2012). With this question, we like to check whether this is the case here too.
10a. Why did the runner up end up on the second position?
Try to find out the difference between the selected candidate and the runner up candidate.
10b. Which was / were the decisive criterion / criteria not to appoint the candidate?
11a. In this procedure, how many female candidates applied?
Ask clarifying and concretizing questions on responses:
- Why were there no / so few (so many?) female candidates?
11b. How many female candidates were on the long/ short list?
Long list: list of applicants after first selection by committee.
11c. Why were they (not) appointed?
Short list: final list of applicants taken into consideration (and invited for an interview/lecture).
12. Can you give an example of a case in which the selection process turned out to be very successful, i.e., that the chosen candidate performed beyond expectations?


















































































   199   200   201   202   203