The decision to advance a candidate rests with the university librarian and is based on the recommendation of the Professional Advancement Review Committee (Committee) following a review of the candidate’s professional advancement dossier.
The review process is confidential, objective and evidence based. Committee members are expected to provide constructive feedback regarding the growth and development of the candidate in a fair but rigorous manner. Confidentiality of the review process is essential in order to allow for frank and honest deliberations.
2.1 Membership
This Committee consists of:
-
University librarian (chair);
-
Administrative Officer;
-
the candidate’s manager;
-
the candidate’s advocate (if applicable);
-
three others, individually selected by the candidate, university librarian and the candidate’s manager.
The advocate is a library staff member selected by the candidate. The candidate can choose to ask to have their manager serve in the role.
The candidate, manager, and university librarian each select one of the three other committee members. The candidate identifies their choice, along with the names of other colleagues for consideration, that may include librarian/archivists, non-professional staff, and faculty members from the University of Waterloo.
The manager and University Librarian may or may not select a peer from this list, but their selection must be someone who have been associated with the candidate in their job-related or professional activities in order to speak to the relevant advancement criteria and provide suitable evaluative feedback.
2.2 Roles
University librarian
-
appoints the Committee;
-
reviews the written recommendation submitted by the administrative officer on behalf of the Committee;
-
where applicable, reviews letters of reference;
-
chairs and schedules a final review meeting;
-
decides whether a candidate advances and notifies the Committee;
-
informs the candidate about the outcome of the advancement review in person or by phone within three working days of the final review meeting;
-
sends a letter to the successful candidate outlining their achievements and opportunities for the future;
-
makes a public announcement about successful advancements.
Administrative Officer
- provides administrative support to the advocate and Committee;
-
solicits any letters of reference regarding the candidate’s performance, impact and readiness to advance;
-
chairs Committee meeting, in the absence of the university librarian, to discuss the candidate’s suitability to advance prior to the final review meeting with the university librarian;
-
following the meeting, submits a written draft advancement recommendation on behalf of the Committee to the university librarian, briefly summarizing the candidate’s strengths, areas for growth, and any concerns about the suitability of the candidate for advancement;
-
works with Human Resources to arrange for salary adjustment following a successful advancement.
Advocate
-
provides input and guidance in the preparation of a candidate’s dossier in alignment with the criteria for professional advancement;
-
submits the candidate’s dossier to the university librarian with a list of suggestions for potential committee members;
-
initiates the discussion at the meeting by providing a comprehensive overview of the candidate and their performance relating to the advancement.
Non-administrative member
- reviews a candidate’s dossier in order to assess performance, impact and readiness to advance;
-
attends review meetings to discuss the candidate’s suitability for advancement;
-
assists with the drafting of a written recommendation regarding a candidate’s advancement for submission by the associate university librarian, administration and strategic initiatives to the university librarian ahead of the final review meeting;
-
provides constructive feedback regarding the growth and development of the candidate.
Previous Page | Next Page
