Abstract
Abstract
This study examines the dynamics of academic hiring practices, specifically focusing on the concept of ‘fit’, an evaluative criterion that extends beyond academic qualifications to match candidates to the entry-level professoriate jobs in the hiring process. Studies show that in the pursuit of the right ‘fit’, evaluators often prioritize candidates who match with the existing departmental framework. Less is known about how fit as a criterion, while effective in reducing hiring uncertainties, potentially limits diversity within academia. The inclination towards homophily, cultural matching, and reliance on network connections, though aiding in risk mitigation, may inadvertently conflict with broader institutional goals of internationalization and diversity set forth by the institutional actors and governments. This conflict creates the need for a challenging balance: ensuing internal departmental coherence with the objective of increasing faculty diversity to meet university-wide goals. Our research employs a mixed-method approach, drawing on insights from full-time tenured professors at top Taiwanese public universities. Through a factorial survey experiment and qualitative interviews, we show how faculty evaluators balance in academic hiring, one that considers both the individual qualifications of candidates and the broader institutional objectives of diversity and internationalization in hiring early-career researchers. The findings indicate that an emphasis on departmental fit to minimize uncertainties often contributes to the underrepresentation of diversity in academia. This paper contributes to the studies on the academic labor market outcomes for early-career researchers, highlighting the tensions between maintaining departmental fit and achieving diversity goals. We identify potential inequalities emerging from these hiring practices and offer a comprehensive view of the complexities involved in academic hiring decisions.