Based on information gathered in a survey of senior academic administrators and from in-depth, on-site interviews with faculty, staff, and trustees on campuses across the United States, the successes and failures of principal academic personnel--traditional tenure, tenure with modifications, and nontenure term-contract systems--are described. Chapter 1, "Tenure in Context," provides a historical backdrop for the discussion of traditional tenure and departures from tradition. The second chapter, "Institutions Without Tenure," reviews in detail the employment policies of three colleges that decided to forgo tenure completely. Chapter 3, "Life Without Tenure," appraises the drawbacks and benefits of nontenure systems. In "Tenure and Nontenure Tracks," policies that establish tenure-track positions for some faculty and non-tenure-track positions for other faculty are considered. Chapter 5, "Extended Probationary Periods and Suspension of 'Up-or-Out' Rule," assesses policies designed to defer the tenure decision and thereby slow the march of untenured faculty members toward tenure tracks. "Tenure Quotas," in the sixth chapter, examines the advisability of tenure quotas--predetermined limits or general guidelines designed to control the percentage of faculty on tenure at one time. Chapter 7, "Sound Tenure Policy," analyzes the policies and practices of three schools where tenure policies work well, and Chapter 8, "Evaluating Tenure Faculty," addresses faculty evaluation both before and after tenure. Chapter 9, "Distributing Rewards and Applying Sanctions," considers salary administration and the conditions necessary for an effective merit pay program and proposes strategies to meet states' objectives of a given policy. The final chapter, "Auditing and Improving Faculty Personnel Systems," furnishes a general guide to "audit" the effectiveness of any academic personnel system and provides guidance likely to improve personnel policies and policy administration. Appendix A states the promotion and tenure policies of the Harvard Business School, which was found to be a model statement in terms of completeness, clarity, and candor. Appendix B presents a sample printout from a simulation model of faculty flow. An index and references are provided. (LC)