**Jin Liu 1, Zhaohui Yin 2,\*, Wenjing Lyu <sup>3</sup> and Songyue Lin <sup>1</sup>**


Received: 18 October 2019; Accepted: 28 November 2019; Published: 5 December 2019

**Abstract:** In the context of global innovation systems, it has become a universal law that the resource elements of scientific and technological innovation, such as talents, flow along the track of high efficiency to the regions that can produce high benefits. As faculty in research universities are important resources of scientific and technological innovation, developing countries such as China have sought to accelerate the transnational mobility of faculty by leveraging income. This study endeavors to gain a better understanding of the motivations for and the outcomes of faculty mobility at Chinese research universities and to determine whether attaining higher income levels through academic mobility can be considered a lever for facilitating change and improving the status of the academic profession in China. Using survey data from 445 faculty members at 11 major research universities in China, this study found a significant relationship between mobility frequency and indirect income. The findings also revealed, however that employees' different attitudes toward income during the process of mobility are a key variable in confirming academic professional boundaries. The findings suggest that more successful mechanisms to attract or retain talented scholars should be developed and that these mechanisms should not focus exclusively on income.

**Keywords:** global innovation systems; Chinese research university; faculty income; academic mobility; academic labor market; ordinary labor market

### **1. Introduction**

In today's globalized world, with the closer economic and technological links between countries, the original barriers have been continuously broken, and the mobility of innovative resources such as talents, technology, and capital has continued to increase. Faculty members have the option to transfer between universities and across working sectors. They may consider moving from one institution to another or to a working environment outside the education sector for a variety of reasons, including intellectual collaborations with other scholars [1], better working conditions [2,3], better facilities [4], more scientific output [5], and family reasons [6,7]. Job mobility for faculty can produce a number of positive outcomes, including an increase in productivity [8], new knowledge, and reported satisfaction [9–11].

However, a limited number of studies have focused on the influence of money on faculty mobility. Will faculty members choose to move because of high income (Is money the key factor that influences faculty mobility?)? Does income in China increase following a move compared to countries with mature academic labor markets, such as the U.S. and European countries? We know little about experiences with and motivations for mobility among faculty from countries in which the academic profession is undergoing dramatic alterations in terms of emerging or changing academic labor markets.

Mindful of the facets of the "pull-push" phenomenon [12], this study endeavors to gain a better understanding of the motivations for and the outcomes of faculty mobility at Chinese research universities and to determine whether attaining higher income levels through academic mobility can be considered a lever for facilitating change and improving the status of the academic profession in China. Using responses received from the Survey of Faculty Mobility, which was carried out by the Changing Academic Profession project team from mainland China (http://www.hse.ru/en/org/hse/ cinst/academic\_profession\_eng), this study examines factors that influence faculty mobility at 11 major Chinese universities. This study seeks to resolve three main questions: 1) Does job mobility result in changes to income? 2) What factors, such as academic output, working environment and professional satisfaction, contribute to mobility? 3) Is the relation between faculty mobility and income correlated with gender, academic titles, qualification, experience abroad, or discipline?

Related to the main research questions, this study also endeavors to determine the types of academic institutions and faculties that benefit most from mobility. In China, the frequency of faculty mobility is currently somewhat low; however, the development of globalized education may encourage greater interest in moving to another academic institution and/or to employment outside academe. More comprehensive investigation of the role of faculty mobility is of great significance for improving the environment of the academic profession, promoting job satisfaction and facilitating the management of faculty in higher education institutions (HEIs).

#### **2. Literature Review**

Faculty mobility has become a barometer for the development of HEIs, and a lack of job mobility due to constricted labor markets, which could affect income, may not reflect the actual competence of faculty members [13]. Today, the academic profession is price-negotiable, and income affects mobility to a large extent among academic institutions and between the academic profession and other fields.

#### *2.1. Income: An Important but Not Essential Factor*

In certain countries, the income levels of academic faculty make it difficult for them to maintain a middle-class lifestyle, which renders the academic profession a marginal occupation. While recent studies of the academic profession have found that the impact of income on faculty mobility is important and is accompanied by conditions that may offset the detrimental effects, a number of factors can influence faculty mobility, including income, research resources, institutional prestige, academic cooperation between faculty members, university geographic location, and citizenship. While income and opportunity for promotion play crucial roles, other factors are also important. In a review of the 44 reasons for faculty mobility at the University of Michigan, Moore (1998) found that income ranked fifth, below research grants, research opportunities, departmental reputation, and institutional or departmental leadership.

Income is an important indication of one's satisfaction with the working environment and has considerable influence on mobility [14–16], seeking to negotiate better pay and/or research facilities in another institution. Schools where teachers rated their working conditions as more satisfactory had lower attrition rates and also were schools with higher rates of low-income and/or minority students [17]. Further, lower salaries for academic positions may encourage faculty to transition away from the academic profession. As observed in the responses to the U.S. Survey of Doctorate Recipients, salaries are approximately 20% lower in the education sector than in the business and industry sectors in the U.S. [18]. Additionally, foreign-born, non-native citizens who are highly productive in research and have held appointments for a short period of time are more likely to leave academe and transition to industry [12]. Faculty members who have close contact with industry are more likely to leave the academic profession. In some cases, the move to industry occurs full-time, while it may be part-time in other cases. In the biotechnology field for example, faculty members prefer to job-hop among biotechnology companies. Fearful of a large exodus, Harvard eliminated its

restriction on the commercialization of biotechnology research to avoid losing its best biology scholars to biotechnology companies.

A recent study [19] found that faculty who chose not to move reported satisfaction with the time available for research and expressed stronger organizational commitment. Those who were dissatisfied with the fairness of work evaluations and who believed tenure decisions were not merit-based were more likely to leave. Some researchers explain that the basic difference between the academic and ordinary labor markets lies in employees' different attitudes toward income [20]. In the academic labor market, faculty members pay greater attention to academic accumulation, new discoveries, innovation, and academic dissemination. Therefore, in the process of moving, scholars focus on academic elements such as academic production, institutional prestige and academic title.
