Culture, loyalty, and ego each contribute to personnel decisions in academia, maybe even more so than in business, because our criteria rarely count dollars and widgets. Assessing intellectual merit is difficult and subjective, paving the way for bias or valid differences of opinion.

Culture entails not only distinct national and regional norms, as described in contributions to this Part, but also local university, college, and discipline norms. Both deciders and candidates would do well to consult wise heads about the applicable expectations: standards, precedent, process, transparency, feedback, accountability, recourse, and even etiquette.

Loyalty involves who argues for whom, group agendas, shifting alliances, power structures, and other aspects of local politics. These are harder to discover except by observation, but mentoring advice may help.

Ego issues in personnel cases involve both deciders and candidates. People want their voices heard in the process, on both sides. When theprocedures are fair, people are more likely to accept even undesired outcomes as fair.