The productivity of faculty members often figures prominently in annual evaluations, post-tenure reviews, and decisions about tenure, promotion, merit pay, release time, awards, and other kinds of recognition. Yet the procedures and instruments that institutions use to assess productivity and merit vary, leaving little that unifies the evaluation and rewards system in U.S. higher education. To date, no movement has emerged to standardize the process and maximize objectivity while linking productivity in an empirical fashion to rewards. Disputes and allegations of administrative bias and abuse of the faculty evaluation process often result in dissatisfaction among faculty, low morale, grievances, and litigation. Simplifying the evaluation process and making it more objective would obviously be worthwhile, but changing policies and practices that have evolved over many years on college and university campuses will require effort. In this article, the author proposes a new comprehensive system to objectively evaluate faculty performance by establishing several rankings for different types of work.