Original constructions of the Revision of the Regulations for the Promotion of Faculty Members of the Department of Humanities, Social Sciences, and Arts; Uncertainties of Individual Promotion and Institutional Excellence

 
This paper aims to identify the key characteristics of the main stakeholders of the promotion regulations and to incorporate these characteristics into the innovative revision of the aforementioned regulations in the fields of humanities, social sciences, and arts. The above-mentioned fields of knowledge necessitate a distinct approach to the promotion system due to fundamental differences in the types of achievements and methods of influence, as well as upstream requirements. In this regard, the present article attempts to provide a platform for a targeted revision of the promotion regulations by identifying key stakeholders and the main criteria related to their promotion/promotion. This article, employing a qualitative approach that analyzes upstream documents and conducts interactive interviews with experts, aims to provide a platform for recreating the promotion policy by identifying the main stakeholders of the promotion system and their respective competency criteria.
In the framework of this article, stakeholders are divided into two key groups: “individual,” including faculty members at various levels, and “institutional,” including universities and higher education institutions. The competency criteria of these two categories are also separated into two levels: abstract (based on upstream documents) and concrete (extracted from field analyses). This separation, on the one hand, has enabled normative and strategic analysis of policy documents, and on the other hand, by listening to the voices of experts, has met the need to localize the criteria by the real academic context of the country.
To achieve the assumed future of revising the regulations for the promotion of faculty members, policies are necessary that align individual promotion and institutional promotion in an integrated manner. Linking competency criteria in upstream documents to field realities is the foundation for transforming the promotion system. This link can be formed by designing indicators that simultaneously respond to strengthening individual capabilities (such as problem-based research, educational innovation, and content production) and institutional missions (such as university-society interaction, solving national problems, and promoting scientific governance). Policymaking in this direction requires the creation of a new model for defining the faculty's role within the university’s multifaceted functions so that promotion becomes a multi-path and context-oriented process rather than a linear one. In this regard, the creation of linking mechanisms between different levels of competence is one of the key recommendations of this scenario. These mechanisms should allow universities and research institutions to adhere to macro principles while having the necessary flexibility to define specific indicators based on their missions and local capacities. It is also suggested that the logic of promotion be redefined so that the faculty member is not simply an individual with quantitative production, but rather a responsible actor in the realization of academic goals. Establishing such an approach requires the development of a regulation that can provide a framework for integrating the main criteria of abstract competence and the main criteria of concrete competence at both the individual and institutional levels. Also, transform promotion from a formal mechanism into a strategic tool in the development of higher education in the country. The individual and the institution are the two main stakeholders of the promotion system, who play a key role in meeting each other's expectations, and the crystallization of key competencies depends on the timely actions of the other.