Norwegian version of this page

Rules for appointment to Professor and Associate Professor positions at UiO

These rules came into force from 17 March, 2005 and 30 April, 2005, with later amendments, most recently after the decision of the University Board of 3 December, 2019.


Section 1 General

1. Scope

The regulations apply to Professors and Associate Professors. The rules for appointment and eligibility requirements are the same for Professor I and II, with the exception of the special rules for Professor II in Section 2 below, Section 3, Section 5 No. 12, Section 9.

Docent and Senior Lecturer are primarily promotion positions and are therefore not covered by the regulations. The same procedures are followed for appointment as Senior Lecturer as those for Associate Professor, but within the framework for assessment of basic competence that is presented in Section 9 c. For Docent positions, reference is made to the Regulations relating to appointment and promotion in teaching and research positions Section 1-3 Criteria for appointment in position as Docent and Section 2-2 Procedure and criteria for promotion from position as Senior Lecturer to position as Docent.

2. Permanent employment and fixed term employment

Professors and Associate Professors are employed on a permanent basis, unless there is a legal basis for temporary employment.

Professor II at UiO is normally appointed for a fixed term of five years, unless special reasons indicate that employment in a particular additional position should be permanent.

Section 2 Announcement

Vacant positions should normally be announced publicly and be made known at UiO via internal announcement.

The announcement is comprised of the announcement text and a more detailed job description, either as two separate documents or as a common text. General templates are available for the formulation of announcement texts, which include the fixed standard formulations that should be included.

Section 3 Provisions on exemption from ordinary announcement

1. General

For appointment without prior announcement, it is a prerequisite that a potential job description is assumed.

Exemption may be made from announcement if substitutes and other temporary employees are to be employed for less than six months, and for up to one year if it would result in considerable inconvenience to the employer if the position needed to be announced.

Announcement may also be avoided for appointment to an externally funded position when special reasons indicate in favour of appointment without competition.

Announcement may be further avoided when specific reasons indicate this, but such appointments cannot be made if more than one member of the appointments body oppose this, cf. the Norwegian Act relating to Universities and University Colleges Section 6-3 (4).

Appointment without announcement (both in self-financed and externally funded positions) should only take place if there is reason to believe that there is no-one with the same or stronger competence that could be relevant applicants if the position were to be announced.

A proposal for appointment without announcement of a man to a male-dominated academic environment presupposes a likelihood that only men would be relevant applicants for the position.

Announcement may be limited to internal announcement at UiO if there are specific grounds that indicate that the position should not be announced externally and there is a legal basis for avoiding announcement.

2. Professor II

For appointment to Professor II positions, persons with the desired cutting-edge expertise should combine the main position at another institution with an additional position at UiO.

For appointments to Professor II positions on a fixed term, exceptions may be made to the aforementioned condition for appointment without announcement (that this should only happen if there is reason to believe that there is no-one with the same or stronger competence that could be a suitable applicant if the position were to be announced) and appointment without announcement is permitted based on more detailed academic grounds:

  • An explanation should be given for a specific unsatisfied academic teaching and research need, and the recommending authority must
    • either document that the person proposed for appointment has obvious professor competence, and substantiate that it is unlikely that there are others with equal or better academic qualifications in the relevant field that could be considered likely to apply if the position were to be announced. It should be stated that the assessment should be made in relation to a job description, which ensures that the relevant academic needs are covered, but otherwise have a broad formulation
    • or document that the proposed appointee has obvious professor competence, and establish as probable that, through the appointment, contact can be established with an important academic environment at another university or university college, research institution or another partner within community life and trade and industry. This also applies particularly to academic/cultural competence which is not covered by the general competence criteria. Reasons must be given as to why the contact is of such a nature that the university, in addition to the resource the employee itself represents, benefits from important supervision resources or academic partners.
  • Internal announcement in the external environment (at a partner) should be considered before proposing appointment without announcement, especially when a partial purpose of a position is to strengthen contact with an important external environment.
  • In the case of an extension to a previous appointment without announcement, the same requirements that formed the basis of appointment without announcement for the original appointment should be met.

3. Requirements for relevant subject areas

The following requirements apply for relevant subject areas (both in externally and self-funded positions) for appointment without announcement:

Teaching needs means either teaching in areas where it can be documented that there is currently incomplete coverage under the current syllabus, or teaching in subject areas where supplementary teaching is highly desirable based on academic needs that are not covered by the current syllabus (for example, related to subject areas that one wants to develop, or new educational provisions one wants to establish).

Research needs must be documented, and be viewed in relation to the Faculty's other research units in the relevant subject area. Decisive emphasis must be placed on the candidate's ability to establish or reinforce a productive research environment (through inspiration, academic supervision, international contacts, etc.).

Section 4 Announcement procedure

1. General

The appointing authority announces teaching- and research positions in accordance with the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges Section 6-3 (2). Nonetheless, a member of the Faculty's or equivalent appointments body may always require that the University Board itself carries out the announcement.

For Centres under the University Board, the relevant cooperating Faculty presents a proposed announcement and job description to the appointing authority on the basis of proposals for areas of study and job descriptions formulated by the Centre's Board or the body the Board designates.

In connection with the announcement, a decision should be made about the duties of the position, any qualifying period, job description, whether the position is to be announced nationally and/or in the Nordic countries and internationally:

2. Duties of the position

Consideration should be given as to the duties of the position. Announcements are made on the basis of subject strategic and budgetary priorities.

3. Qualifying period

When there is doubt as to whether any competent applicants will apply, consideration should be given as to whether the announcement should be made at the same time with the possibility of a time-limited qualifying period. See Section 12.

4. Job description

A job description is included with the announcement with further clarification of the subject area/discipline and area of responsibility, required duties and eligibility requirements and other circumstances that will be given emphasis in relation to the appointment. This includes, if desired, an explanation of which sub-domains of the applicants' other qualifications will be particularly emphasised. Announcement and job description can be combined into one document.

5. In which countries the position should be announced

Normal announcement is assumed both in the Nordic countries and internationally on the basis of the subject’s disposition, unless the subject by its content is oriented towards Norwegian conditions.

6. Gender representation

For research and teaching positions in which women are underrepresented in the position groups covered by a quota rule in UiO’s adjustment agreement to the Central Collective Agreement for the Civil Service (Section 31), the following standard formulation shall be included in the announcement: "The University of Oslo has a goal of recruiting more women to permanent academic positions. Women are therefore encouraged to apply”. The adjustment agreement's division into the position groups for affirmative action are 1) academic teaching positions, 2) academic intermediate group positions and 3) academic top positions. The individual Department will normally be the basis, but if special circumstances warrant it, the Faculty or subject area may be the basis for affirmative action.

7. Diversity

UiO places emphasis on achieving a balanced age composition, diversity in the workforce and integration of groups that have difficulty in obtaining employment. UiO will work to raise awareness so as to prevent discrimination on the grounds of gender, age, ethnicity or functional ability. Recruitment should be based on a broad and inclusive approach. Therefore, the announcement template should contain a diversity statement in line with UiO’s policies for equal opportunity, gender balance and diversity. The UiO’s Coordination Group for Equal Opportunity will be the consultative body for any change to the diversity statement. Eligibility requirements must not be formulated in such a way that certain groups are excluded from applying.

8. Conditions for renewed announcement

If the recommending or appointing authority wishes to waive the eligibility requirements in the announcement on a significant point, or there are errors that may be assumed to have significance for the application, the position should normally be announced again.

The position may be announced again if a disproportionately long period of time has elapsed since the announcement was made, or the circumstances have changed significantly, furthermore if it is found that there has not been a sufficient number of qualified applicants and it must be expected that a new announcement might change this situation.

Section 5 Announcement text

Information that the announcement should contain:

  1.  subject area and required duties of the position
  2. basic unit and salary
  3. Alternative 1:
    that the applicant attaches a CV, complete overview of education and previous positions with attached copies of diplomas and certificates, publication list (overview of all publications), complete summary and a brief account of the works that are particularly subject to qualitative assessment attached to these works (the number should not exceed 10*), educational portfolio, as well as overview of qualifications related to dissemination, administration and management with attached documentation.
    Alternative 2:
    applicants are invited in the first instance to submit a short, justified application and CV with a list of publications (see Section 7 for further procedure).
  4. that the applicant should mention the scientific/academic works or parts of works which the applicant wishes to be given particular emphasis in the assessment
  5. rules and guidelines for the appointments procedure
  6. how interested parties can access the job description
  7. that emphasis will be placed on both academic and educational competence
  8. alternatively that the possibility is given for employment for a limited period to become qualified if no competent applicant is registered (cf. Section 10).
  9. that the university has a goal of recruiting more women in permanent academic positions and that women are encouraged to apply (if the position is covered by the affirmative action rules, cf. Section 4 Point 6)
  10. a diversity statement, cf. Section 4 Point 7
  11. that applicants who, upon appointment, are unable to document basic university pedagogical competence must acquire this within two years from appointment
  12. which languages of instruction can be used if the position is to be announced outside the Nordic countries. If the language of instruction is Norwegian, the announcement should include an expectation that the applicant must be able to teach in Norwegian (or another Scandinavian language) within a specific appointment period. This requirement is normally waived in the announcement of Professor II positions, if there is no particular justification for maintaining the requirement.
  13. that appointment will normally be on the basis of personal interviews as well as trial lectures, if relevant. (cf. Section 10)

* Exceptions can be made from this point by allowing the Faculty to limit the page number of the submitted works if such a method is agreed at the national level for the subject. This may be particularly relevant for humanities subjects.

Section 6 Closing date for applications

The closing date for applications is four to six weeks, as determined by the Faculty. It is not permitted to submit or review works after the expiry of the closing date for applications.

Section 7 Use of the Screening Committee

1. The Screening Committee's tasks

Prior to processing by the appointed Expert Committee (see Section 8), applications may, as an alternative arrangement be reviewed by a screening committee, that invites between five and ten of the most interesting applicants to submit complete applications with attached selected publications.

The screening committee has two choices:

  1. Conclude that there are too few/no qualified applicants.

The screening committee may decide that the position should be announced again or that it should not be announced again at the present time, cf. Section 4 No. 8.

  1. Give a brief, reasoned proposal to the experts about which applicants have the most potential and should proceed in the process, without making any kind of ranking. A summary justification should be given for why the other applicants do not proceed in the process.

If the screening committee is in doubt that as to whether an applicant is suitable, the application should always be included. However, all applications are submitted to the experts, who are free to assess more applications than the screening committee finds suitable.

In its work, the screening committee should be aware of UiO’s objective to recruit more women to academic positions.

Note that all applicants, including those who do not proceed, are parties to the case and are entitled to good information in the process.

2. Appointment

The Screening Committee is appointed by the recommending body or the authorized entity, and is a preparatory body for the recommending authority.

3. Requirements for the appointment

  • composed with regard to the position requirements in the announcement
  • at least three members
  • at least two should have competence at the relevant position level
  • both genders should be represented

Section 8 Appointment of experts etc.

1. General

Applicants should be judged by the appointed experts who give an assessment of the applicants' qualifications, cf. the competence profile described in Section 9, to the recommending authority before it makes its recommendations. It is important to note the division of roles between the expert committee and the recommending authority, and that the expert assessment forms only part of the basis for recommendation. The recommending authority or the authorised entity appoints the experts based on proposals from the academic environment.

2. Requirements for the appointment

  • At least three experts.
  • Competence at the relevant position level. At least one must have professor competence when assessing applicants for intermediate group positions.
  • Preferably only one member from the University of Oslo, but for some professional subjects it would be natural with two members from two different Faculties at UiO.
  • For professorships, as far as possible one member from another country.
  • Both genders represented among the experts.
  • The Committee is composed in such a way that it has the competence to assess all applicants that are covered by the announcement.

If representation of both genders is not possible, special grounds must be given.

3. Impartiality

It should be clarified that the experts do not have close ties to any of the applicants or have a particular advantage or disadvantage in assessing any of them, cf. Section 6 and 8 of the Public Administration Act. However, any knowledge of the applicant does not imply disqualification.

When expert committees are composed, emphasis shall be placed on supervisor relationships or close academic cooperation, including co-authorship. The members of the committee shall inform the administrator of such circumstances. The assessment from the Committee should, in cases where this has been a topic, give a short account of the questions that have been discussed and the conclusions drawn. In case of doubt or disqualification, the Faculty should be contacted.

Both those who are to appoint experts and those who are to be/are appointed are responsible for stating whether there are particular circumstances that are likely to impair confidence in the impartiality of the experts. Such an assessment will always be discretionary.

4. Assessment method

The Expert Committee shall have an administrative leader who should come from the Faculty. The administrative leader of the Committee convenes the committee and administrates the work of the experts.

The experts will normally work as a committee, but the recommending authority or the authorized entity can decide in each case that the experts should give individual assessments.

The Committee submits a joint assessment to the Faculty. If there is dissent in the committee, the grounds for the different stances should be included in the statement.

5. Special experts

In addition to the ordinary experts and possibly, according to their proposals, in special cases one or more special experts may be appointed to assess portions of the material that the applicant has submitted. Any special experts submit individual assessments, which are submitted as guidance to the ordinary experts.

6. Information for applicants

When the experts have been appointed and have accepted the assignment, all applicants shall be informed of who has been appointed.

7. Deadline for the experts

The experts’ assessment should normally be available within three months from their appointment. If the assessment cannot be submitted within the deadline, grounds for this should be given to the Faculty.

Section 9 Expert assessment

The experts shall provide an instructive assessment, in which at least three of the applicants who are deemed competent according to the job description are ranked.

a) Brief account of the competence profile

The competence profile operates within the following six areas:

  • Academic qualifications (Point 1.1 below)
  • Other professional qualifications (Point 1.2 below)
  • Educational qualifications (Point 1.3 below)
  • Dissemination qualifications (Point 1.4 below)
  • Management and administration qualifications (Point 1.5 below)
  • Personal qualifications (Point 1.6 below)

Other relevant competence can be considered where the announcement text provides the basis for this. The experts usually only take into account the first five of these qualification areas. “Personal qualifications” may, however, be taken into consideration by the experts if the material the Committee has access to provides the basis for this. Otherwise, these will be first taken into consideration by the recommending and appointing authorities in connection with interviews and/or follow-up of references. The recommending and appointing authorities may also carry out supplementary assessments of qualifications other than the personal ones, cf. Sections 12 and 14.

b) Assessment basis

Applicants should be assessed with a view to

1.1 Academic qualifications

  • Own research, initiative to, design/management of research projects/research groups or participation in such work
  • Qualifications in these areas may be replaced/supplemented by artistic qualifications in special subjects/in special positions where this is included in the announcement text

1.2 Other professional qualifications may include

  • Specialist competence in line with established specialist programmes in the subject area (e.g. in medicine and odontology), clinical competence, museum work, competence for other professional activities
  • Assessment work for appointments and assessment for degrees
  • Activity as a referee/reviewer in academic/scientific journals
  • Textbooks, exhibitions and catalogues
  • Contributions to innovation based on research and academic development work
  • Qualifications in these areas may be replaced/supplemented by artistic qualifications in special subjects/in special positions where this is included in the announcement text

1.3 Educational qualifications

Educational qualifications are documented through an educational portfolio consisting of an overview of the applicant's practical experience and competence, documentation of cited conditions, and a concise reflection note relating to teaching experience, learning vision, results achieved, development work and the like. Documented educational qualifications are expected to be based on the four criteria areas derived from Scholarships of Teaching and Learning (SoTL):

  • Focus on student learning
  • A clear development over time
  • A researching approach
  • A collegial attitude and practice

This is described further in the Guide to Applicants and members of the Expert Committee Point 2.2. Examples of educational qualifications that can be included:

  • Pedagogical education
  • Teaching (at different levels and in varied forms), exam- and assessment work
  • Research supervision at different levels (Bachelor, Master, PhD)
  • Education management, work on development/audit/renewal of study programmes/courses/other teaching programmes
  • Responsibility for and/or participation in the preparation of new learning methods
  • Active use of IT competence in teaching and evaluation, innovative use of digital learning environments and learning resources
  • Responsibility for and/or participation in the preparation of textbooks, digital teaching materials and other learning resources
  • Development work and research related to their own/the institution’s educational activities
  • Participation in analyses and evaluation of education and education quality at own or other institutions
  • Management of/participation in conferences of a subject didactic character and as author/referee/member of editorial staff in subject didactic journals
  • Collegial cooperation in a special academic environment related to work on education quality

For employees at the University museums, qualifications in these areas may be replaced/supplemented by museum dissemination qualifications where this is included in the announcement text.

1.4 Qualifications for external academic activities (dissemination)

  • Education in research dissemination/translation work, etc.
  • Research- and knowledge dissemination beyond their own academic environment (local, national and international)
  • Academic and/or literary translation work
  • Academically founded contributions to relevant situations, debates, conflicts and the like in society via various media
  • Management of/participation in public report work, etc.
  • Academic activity/academic contribution to the work of voluntary organizations

1.5 Management and administration qualifications

  • Education in management/administration
  • Activity in administrative functions or as the manager of such (at different levels/in different functions) within/outside of higher education/research
  • Participation in/management of councils, Boards of Directors, committees, working groups etc. inside and outside of the institution

1.6 Personal qualifications

  • Personal suitability for the work, depending on the type of work the position entails (such as good collaborative skills and positive contribution to the working environment)

The sub-points of the different qualifications are not an exhaustive list of what can be included in the qualification assessment

For Professor II positions, research management and research can be documented in another way than through traditional publishing and is given greater emphasis when the research is of high quality and the documented competence is relevant for the position.

c) Requirement for “basic academic competence”

A basic academic competence is required for all academic positions.

For professors this requirement entails substantial academic production in excess of that which is required for a doctorate. The research must be of high quality and demonstrate both breadth and depth. The production shall reflect an independent research profile and demonstrate the ability to address new problems. Sustained research activity is a prerequisite for the granting of professor competence.

Academic basic competence for Associate Professor is a Norwegian doctoral degree in the relevant field of study, or equivalent foreign doctoral degree approved as equivalent to a Norwegian doctoral degree, or equivalent level of competence documented by academic work of the same scope and quality.

In addition, for some academic positions, other academic basic competence is required, such as specialist education or corresponding qualifications in accordance with the job description.

For Senior Lecturer, the qualification basis corresponds to Associate Professor. The workload and level of research and development work shall correspond to a doctoral thesis. Cf. The regulations for appointment and promotion to teaching- and research positions.

d) Basic university pedagogical competence

Basic university pedagogical competence at UiO consists of the following elements:

Through own teaching/supervising and completed university pedagogical education (minimum 200 hours) the following competencies shall be developed and documented:

  • Basic competencies in planning, implementation, evaluation and development of teaching and academic supervision
  • Be able to reflect on their own role and discuss and justify their own choices in planning, implementation and development of teaching and academic supervision
  • Be able to ground their university pedagogical competence in the SoTL criteria:
    • Focus on student learning
    • A clear development over time
    • A researching approach
    • A collegial attitude and practice

Applicants for the position of Associate Professor who cannot document this on appointment shall be obliged to satisfy the requirements within two years from commencement. If specific reasons allow it, also applicants for the position of professor who do not satisfy the requirements for basic university pedagogical competence, may be given a two-year deadline from commencement to meet these. However, the main rule for appointment to professorships is that the requirement should be met at the time of appointment.

e) Additional requirements for professorship

In addition to the requirements for academic and basic university pedagogical competence as set out in Point d), some additional requirements are imposed for appointment to a professorship. These competencies must be documented at the time of appointment.

For professorships in addition to basic university pedagogical competence as described above, the following is required to be documented:

  • A broad range of competencies in planning, implementation, and evaluation of teaching
  • Broad experience from academic supervision, preferably at Master/PhD level
  • A wide range of competencies in systematic development work related to teaching and academic supervision
  • Efforts, leadership and cooperation in own academic environment related to work on education quality

In addition, applicants for a position as a professor must document qualifications beyond the usual performance of required duties in a lower-level position within either dissemination qualifications or management and administration qualifications.

Qualifications beyond the basic requirements for the position count towards the overall assessment when ranking competent applicants. Particular emphasis is placed on qualifications closely related to the position's announcement area.

f) The assessment procedure

In their assessment of the applicants, following a first review of the candidates' qualifications, the experts shall arrive at a limited number of applicants who they find are qualified above the others, according to the job description. The experts will undertake a thorough assessment of the competence of at least three of the applicants, if so many applicants are considered to be qualified.

The Expert Committee shall give an opinion as to what differentiates the selected applicants from the rest. It is therefore assumed that it will give a brief review of all the applicants and their qualifications. An applicant who withdraws their application before the expert assessment is available will not normally be discussed, but the review cannot be retroactively removed.

The Committee shall rank the applicants who, after an overall assessment and according to the job description, are considered best qualified for the position. Normally, at least three applicants should be ranked in the order they should be considered when there are several qualified applicants for a position. In the ranking of qualified applicants, the entire breadth of qualifications will be included in the evaluation and be assessed explicitly. For ordinary Professor positions (or Assistant Professor positions), priority will be given to academic qualifications over other qualifications, unless otherwise stated. Educational qualifications, unless otherwise stated in the announcement text, will be given priority over qualifications within the areas of dissemination, administration and management.

g) Practising of affirmative action rules

If several applicants in the selection below are considered to have approximately equal qualifications after assessment of the academic/professional, educational and other qualifications, a female applicant should be given precedence over a male applicant. (Cf. Basic Agreement for State Employees.)

h) Qualifying position

When the possibility of a qualifying period is announced, the experts shall give an opinion on the applicants' prerequisites for obtaining the necessary qualifications for the position during the period. If no competent applicant has been registered, the experts should assess the order in which applicants should be ranked for such employment for a limited period in the position. Cf. Section 13.

Section 10 Comments and access to information

1. Comments from applicants and others

A copy of the entire assessment from the experts is sent to all applicants personally, including applicants who have not progressed further after processing by the Screening Committee, before the case is referred for processing by the recommending authority. Also, assessments from any specialist experts should be sent to applicants. At this stage in the process, applicants have the opportunity to comment on the assessment, with a deadline of fourteen days. Any comments from applicants will accompany the case.

The applicants are not entitled to appeal the decision in appointment cases (cf. the Public Administration Act Section 3 second subsection).

For main positions combined with clinical or diagnostic additional positions at the hospitals, a copy of the applications and the expert's assessment are submitted to the other employer for an opinion before the case is processed by the recommending body. This shall also apply for additional positions at the university in combination with other main positions.

2. Access to information

The expert assessment can be sent to interested parties on request. This takes place after the deadline for comments has expired.

Section 11 Recommending Authority

Cf. Normal rules for Faculties and Normal rules for Departments (Norwegian) and the individual Faculty's management regulations.

Recommendations are made for teaching and research positions at the Faculty level when the University Board carries out the appointment, in accordance with Section 6-3 (1) of the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges The Department level, or a separate recommending body at the Faculty*, is the recommending authority when the Faculty is the appointing authority, cf. Section 14.

For Centres under the Board, recommendations for professorships of an interdisciplinary nature are made by the recommending- and appointing authority at the relevant cooperating Faculty, on the basis of proposals for areas of study and job descriptions prepared by the Centre. The Expert Committee's assessment is considered by the recommending authority at the Centre before the Faculty presents its recommendation to the University Board.

Centres under the faculties are adapted to the appointments system at the individual Faculty.

* at faculties with a flat structure

Section 12 Recommendations

1. General

In the case of all appointments, the recommending authority shall base its recommendations on an overall assessment of the academic and societal needs and gender composition in the environment. The recommending authority shall ensure that the affirmative action rules are adhered to, and that other considerations are taken into account in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

The main basis for any assessment of applicants is the eligibility requirements in Clause 1.1. up to and including Clause 1.5 under Section 9 Expert assessment. As a supplement to the expert assessment, the various qualification areas can also be assessed by means of interview, trial lecture and reference interviews.

If the recommending body finds that the assessment is not a sufficient basis for assessing applicants, the case may be returned to the experts for supplementary information. This may take place on their own initiative or on the basis of comments from applicants. This is relevant where there are errors in administrative procedures or when significant information is lacking, but only in cases where the issue may have an impact on the appointment case. An applicant is not entitled to have his comments presented to the experts. If the need for supplementary information is already present during the case preparation, the chairman of the body may decide that this should be collected before the case is presented to the recommending body.

If the recommending or appointing body finds that the opinion of the experts cannot form the basis for appointment, the body may decide to start all over again with the experts. This is a solution that should only be used in very special cases.

Appointment and extension to appointment in externally funded positions is contingent on the fact that the Faculty can document a clear and recognised need for teaching and/or research in the relevant subject area.

2. Assessment of personal suitability

As a supplement to the expert assessment, the applicants that the Expert Committee has ranked as the best are also assessed in terms of personal suitability for the position. The intention is to obtain supplementary information about the applicant's qualifications as a co-worker, environment creator and in relation to interpersonal skills, and to prevent appointments which are likely to have a negative effect on the academic environment. The characteristics of each applicant in relation to this should therefore be assessed and discussed. As a general rule, applicants should be invited to attend an interview.

Personal suitability should be documented as far as possible. This may be documented, for example, through reference interviews, certificates, assignment letters, and project reports, through trial lectures, and it can be demonstrated through an interview. In this context it is important that concrete, verifiable questions are posed during the interview.

There are in particular two important principles to consider in respect of assessment of personal suitability for a position:

  1. Characteristics that are emphasized must be relevant for the work to be performed. The degree of relevance will again be decisive for the degree to which the characteristics can be emphasized.
  2. If emphasis is placed on something in respect of one of the applicants being assessed, there is an obligation to also assess this in respect of the other applicants.

The recommending authority, or the authorized entity, designates an academically representative interview committee of three to five people to conduct the interview, and may further decide to conduct a trial lecture or other tests.

Where the Faculty is the appointing body, the Head of Department designates a committee that will normally consist of the Head of Department/Deputy Head, one academic employee and one student representative. If the Faculty is to make recommendations, the Dean will designate a committee which will normally consist of the Dean/Vice-Dean, the Head of Department/Deputy Head and one student representative. If the position is not a teaching position, the student representative may be replaced by a different member. The Committee can be supplemented.

2.1 Interview

An interview is a key tool in assessing the applicant's personal suitability. The interview may also be used to further clarify the applicant's educational competence and further research plans. The employer is responsible for clarifying to the applicants any special conditions and other circumstances relating to the position.

The interview committee conducts conversations with applicants, collects references, and draws up a concise document that forms the basis of the case when a recommendation is to be made. In its summary of the interview, the committee must endeavour to keep separate specific (factual) information about and from the applicant, and the competence- and suitability assessments made after the interview. See example of an interview guide.

2.2 Reference interview

Reference interviews are used to check the information that has been provided about previous employment and the impression that has been formed of the applicant. Normally it would be appropriate to contact past and current employers. Only persons whom the applicant offers as references should be contacted. However, the applicant may be asked to provide supplementary references from other employment. See example of a reference interview guide.

2.3. Trial lecture

The purpose of the trial lecture is to document the ability to disseminate research-based knowledge adapted to the relevant target group. The trial lecture may also contribute to the assessment of personal suitability, for example by observing the interaction between the applicant and students, or to assess the applicant's digital competence through the use of various digital learning methods and learning technologies

3. Recommendation by Head of SFF/SFI without announcement

When a Professor has been the key person in obtaining an SFF (Centre of Exellence) or SFI (Centre for Research-based Innovation) for his area, the requirements for appointment without announcement would normally be met. Relevant paragraphs of the application in connection with the approval of the Centre serve as documentation and are attached to the case. The same applies to an extension without announcement if the duties remain unchanged after the first period.

A start-up conversation is conducted with the employer (Dean/Head of Department) in conjunction with the appointment to clarify the duties related to the appointment.

4. Ranking

Normally, three applicants should be ranked in the order in which they should be considered when there are several qualified applicants for a position.

A justification should be given for the order in which the recommended applicants are placed.

If there is dissent in the recommending body, the different stances shall be justified and the minutes showing the voting accompanies the case.

A written statement shall be given on the qualifications and suitability for the position of the recommended applicants on the basis of

  • the announcement text and the job description
  • the experts’ assessment
  • assessment of the trial lecture
  • minutes from any interviews and references related to personal suitability for the position

The recommending body must then weigh the results of the different assessments against each other in the final ranking. Although the same general rule for weighting of qualifications is applied, cf. Section 9 f, an overall assessment may result in the recommending body arriving at a different ranking than the expert committee.

5. Exemption from public disclosure

The recommending authority’s recommendation to the appointing authority is exempt from public disclosure in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act Section 25. The provisions relating to exemption from public disclosure for the recommending authority's recommendations to the appointing body do not prevent more public disclosure being allowed by further agreement whenever this might be desirable. However, assessments of personal suitability for the position must be exempted from public disclosure. The applicant's right of access to information is set out in the Regulation to the Public Administration Act, Chapter 5.

Section 13 Employment for a limited period  

If no competent applicant has been registered, the recommending authority may propose employment for a limited period in the position in accordance with Section 6-5 (1) of the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges. This possibility must have been mentioned in the announcement. The person in question is entitled to be appointed to the position if he/she has managed to be qualified. It is a prerequisite that circumstances are facilitated for the person in question to be given the opportunity to qualify for the position during the period.

If it is absolutely necessary to appoint someone due to the teaching situation, and it has not been possible to obtain applicants on the basis of Section 6-5 of the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges, a temporary appointment may be made in a lower position that the person in question is qualified for in accordance with Section 6-5 (2) of the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges.

Section 14 The appointing authority

1. General

The appointing body ultimately determines which of the recommended applicants is best qualified for the position on the basis of the recommendation and the requirements in the announcement.

When the University Board is not the appointing body, appointment to teaching- and research positions is undertaken by the faculties.

A dedicated central appointing body carries out appointments for units without faculty affiliation when the Faculty has the recommending authority.

The appointing authority is responsible for assessing the gender equality aspect of the appointment.

The Dean, Head of Department or an authorized entity may, in accordance with the recommendations of the recommending authority, carry out appointments to positions with a shorter duration than one year.

2. Extensions by authorisation

There is the possibility for the extensions to the positions of Professor II and Associate Professor II/Associate Professor in a 20% position to be carried out by the Dean by authorization from the Faculty Board. The prerequisite is that the same requirements that form the basis of the original appointment have been met, for both appointment with and without announcement.

3. Professorships, Professor promotion and Docent promotion

A conditional (partial) delegation of appointing authority has been adopted for professorships from the University Board and the Board's appointments committee to the faculties. Approval of promotion to Professor, and appointment and promotion to Docent is delegated in its entirety to the faculties.

a) Cases delegated to the faculties

  1. Announcements, with the exception of SKO 1404 Professor of academic management
  2. Appointment of Professor I (SKO 1013) with announcement
  3. Appointment of Professor II with and without announcement
  4. Extensions of Professor II
  5. Promotion to Professor and rejection of applications for promotion to Professor

Appointment to such positions is undertaken by a body (Board, appointments committee or similar, not by an individual).

A copy of the minutes with the decisions on appointments and promotions is sent to the secretariat of the University Board's Appointments Committee if the minutes are not available online.

b) Cases to be processed by the Central Appointments Committee (AU)

  1. Announcement of Professor of Academic Management (SKO 1404)
  2. Appointment of Professor of Academic Management (SKO 1404)
  3. Appointment to Professor I position (SKO 1013) without announcement ("nominations")
  4. Other cases that the Dean or a recommending or appointing body at the Faculty want to submit to the Appointments Committee.

c) The Central Appointments Committee’s supervisory function in general

  1. In cases delegated to the Faculty and where one or more of the applicants presents a reasoned objection to the administrative procedure, the Appointments Committee shall automatically, and without undue delay, be sent a copy of the applicant's comments and information regarding the Faculty's processing of these. On this basis, the Appointments Committee will decide whether it will accept the case for processing. Comments that have been clarified with the applicant need not be submitted to the Appointments Committee.
  2. The Rector may require that any appointment case be submitted to the Appointments Committee.

The Central Appointments Committee’s supervisory role as a control body in the recommendation- and appointment process for delegated cases applies both before and after the appointment decision has been made in the relevant individual case. In order to avoid unnecessary delays, any objections for presentation to the Appointments Committee should be submitted immediately after the comments procedure has been completed and, wherever possible, before the appointment decision has been made.

Section 15 Appointment

Appointments are made on the basis of recommendations.

The appointing authority, in the same way as the recommending authority, can decide that an interview and/or trial lecture should be conducted.

Section 16 Appeal and reversal of a decision

Decisions relating to appointment may not be appealed pursuant to the Public Administration Act, and are also exempt from the rules relating to justification and reversal pursuant to the same Act, cf. Section 3 second subsection, second sentence of the Public Administration Act.

 However, a decision in an appointment case may be reversed if the conditions pursuant to Section 35 of the Public Administration Act are met, and the body has decided that the aforementioned subsection should apply. For example, reversal may take place if the individual in question has not been informed of the decision or if the decision contains such errors that it must be deemed invalid. Reversal before the applicant has been informed may be appropriate, for example, in cases where decisive new information comes to light after the decision has been reached. For example, a decision may be invalid if such errors in administrative procedure have been made that there is reason to believe that the decision would have been different if such errors had not been made.

Section 17 Validity

These rules came into force from 17 March 2005 and 30 April 2005, with later amendments, most recently after the decision of the University Board of 3 December 2019.

Published Sep. 25, 2012 3:07 PM - Last modified Jan. 29, 2020 11:05 AM