As I see it, there are three ways to look at tenure, promotion, salary, etc.

1. compensation for doing unpleasant or undesirable work
2. motivation to do stuff your employer wants you to do
3. recognition of the value you contribute to the employing organization

When you say you are doing something a particular way “to get tenure” or “to get promotion”, you are working in one of the first 2 models.

The thing you are doing is something you wouldn’t otherwise do. The reward motivates your action. (The fancy-pants word for this is extrinsic motivation.)

Do you really teach well, only because you won’t keep your job or get promoted if you don’t?

Or do you want to inspire a future generation? Do you want to pass on knowledge of a subject you find fascinating? Do you think knowledge of your subject will make your students better human beings, or more effective in whatever they choose to do with their lives?

What about committee work and major administrative jobs in your department or faculty?

Do you do these because you have to to earn external rewards?

Or do you believe that academics are the best people to run academic programs and make decisions about the running of the university? Do you do your part because you think collegiate self-governance is important? Do you hold ideals about democratic organizations? Are you critical of the increasing role of managers, with little or no academic background, in the running of our institutions?

Do you do research because it is in your job contract?

Or is research one of the things that got you interested in an academic career in the first place? Are you fascinated by your topic? Do you have lots of questions that you are burning to investigate?

And do you publish your research and scholarship because you have to to get promoted?

Or do you publish your research in order to contribute to the very debates that sparked your interest and continue to hold it? Because you think that there are other researchers who are wrong? Or, if not wrong, whose explanations could be improved if only they knew what you have been working on?

The third model: Recognition

What if the criteria that are being used to reward you actually recognize the value that you bring to the organization?

Maybe you can ignore the fact that you will be evaluated on these things from time to time and just focus on doing what you really want to be doing anyway. (Fancy pants word: intrinsic motivation)

Which isn’t to say that you are going to love sitting on that committee, or running your MA program.

Or that publishing isn’t incredibly anxiety producing and frustrating, especially since you know all this stuff and have new questions you are burning to investigate and why does it take so loooong to write all this stuff out and get it out into the world so other people know it.

Or that teaching doesn’t always feel inspiring. And can be incredibly difficult and time consuming. Don’t get me started on the certification obsessed who seem to care nothing about learning anything at all.

Neither does it mean that it is easy to allocate your time to these tasks. To prioritize. To decide that your contribution is “good enough” and you have other important things to do.

There will be some things you have to do that you are not intrinsically motivated to do.

That’s life. And you are a grown up. I’m sure you can handle that.

My point is, that the bulk of your work should be stuff you really want to do. That you think is really important. And that you might find some way to do even if it made no difference to your salary, promotion, or whatever.

I’ll tackle the issue of how to present what you do for evaluation another day.